On Sat, 2005-01-22 at 22:17 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > On Sat, 22 Jan 2005 10:23:12 -0600, Josh Boyer > > If the Core install CDs give you an option to install from the Extras > > CDs at _install_ time, and you have the choice to not accept the > > default, then I could be OK with that. > > I would very much want this to be supported in the installer. adding > repositories and selecting packages from the extras and alternatives > repo including the ability to install them from kickstart would > satisfy everyone I believe. Agreed. Fedora Core and Fedora Extras (maybe even alternatives) could still be packaged together in a DVD ISO for those that want "one ISO to rule them all". So maybe given that, we could look at reorganizing the CD ISOs as you suggested. > > > > > However, my main concern with moving KDE to Extras is not ISO > > organization. It's more of a maintainership issue. > > valid concern. I already answered this one too to a limited extend . > here is a more detailed answer. > > You might be well aware that kde-redhat.sf.net project has existed for > quite sometime and is maintained in a active manner. when fedora > extras policy for including packages, redhat or the other members in > the community can ask these people and other upstream KDE developers > to engage themselves with Redhat. one of the previous concerns with > them was that Redhat was making modifications to KDE that was > crippling the user experience for KDE ( I am not making that > accusation. it just already exists). By moving these into extras and > actively inviting the community, it is likely that upstream KDE > developers and others would see this as an oppurtunity to build > packages and provide a better experience for KDE users on fedora. Hm.. I seemed to have missed where you mentioned the kde-redhat.sf.net project earlier. That does make me a bit less apprehensive. I'd still be concerned if KDE was declared as an Extras package, but I can see some reasoning behind it. Who knows, maybe KDE could be the "ultimate test" of whether Extras will really work. > > one of the other benefits of having KDE and other such non default > packages outside fedora core is that the amount of software a typical > end users installs on his/her system is reduced. ideally someone would > step up to make anaconda installer have a minimal setup too. in > essence this improves security and increases maintainability. Agreed. > > Fedora has a stated policy of staying close with upstream. so package > updates dont just include security and bug fixes but also introduces > new features. a typical fedora user usually gigabytes of updates > because there is no easy way to stay conservative and ignore packages > containing new features. I also suggest this capability be introduced > in pup and its command line variants too in FC4. I personally like the fact that Fedora stays close to upstream. It's almost necessary given the release cycle that it has. But maybe a community driven bug-fixes project could fill the gap. Or maybe that's not realistic. Just theorizing here. > > > > Could you kindly point me to where the "defined goal of including only > > defaults" is stated? I can't seem to find it anywhere. > > To be honest I did look for this in the website too but couldnt find > it. It seems to be more of a implicit policy from reading through the > previous discussions in this list. feel free to correct me otherwise No need to correct anyone. It's potentially a good goal. I just couldn't find it stated anywhere. Apologies if it came off a bit harsh. josh
