Adam Williamson wrote:
> Not really. "Fedora.next" was about *allowing* editions / spins to make
> different choices like this. Workstation made this choice because it
> fits in with their vision about how deployment should work. Other
> spins/editions don't have to have the same vision or make the same
> choice.
Well, there are restrictions to what choices are allowed, e.g., there is a
rule mandating SELinux enabled and in enforcing mode.
I also find it interesting that QA has no problems with there being 3
different options for initial setup (GNOME Initial Setup, Anaconda Initial
Setup, or doing it all during the Anaconda installation), but having a
second option for the installer (Calamares) was deemed unacceptable for
official Spins according to you. (It never went to a formal
approval/disapproval vote because no SIG actually wanted to attempt this to
begin with, not even the KDE SIG, but you have made it clear more than once
that QA would be very unhappy with the idea.)
I kinda get the impression that "special sauce" is only allowed if
Workstation wants it (e.g., they managed to weaken even the core Freedom
principle by offering proprietary software in out-of-the-box GNOME Software,
Workstation also ships with a wide-open firewall, etc.), whereas Spins are
held to very strict rules to get approval.
Kevin Kofler
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
