Den ons 3 apr. 2024 kl 23:27 skrev Kevin Kofler via devel <devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
Andreas Tunek wrote:
> From Red Hat's POV it is not Fedora Gnome Workstation (
> https://blogs.gnome.org/uraeus/2020/05/07/gnome-is-not-the-default-for-fedora-workstation/
> ).
TL;DR: "We do not want 'GNOME' in the name because we want to only support
GNOME in Workstation, whereas 'GNOME Workstation' would imply that there are
other Workstations."
I am not sure I buy this argument. By the same argument, we should also not
call the OS "Fedora Linux" because it implies there is also a "Fedora BSD"
or "Fedora Hurd" or even "Fedora Windows" ;-) or something.
Yes, Fedora used to have a correct name, but it was changed.
Giving a product a clear name does not imply existence of another product.
(And that is not even arguing the premise of the "one single Workstation
that happens to use GNOME" concept, only the branding implications!)
> One of the best things with Fedora Workstation is that it is a complete
> user facing OS (like Windows, macOS and iOS) that you actually can develop
> applications for (if you want to). You don't have to target the extremely
> fluffy "Linux desktop", you can target Fedora Workstation. This proposal
> would totally eliminate the good points of having this single OS and app
> platform.
That "conveniently" ignores the existence of that pesky thing called "other
distributions". The GNU/Linux version of vendor lock-in. Thanks Red Hat!
And besides, a standalone application (as opposed to a desktop widget or
similar) developed for one of the Fedora desktop deliverables (Workstation
Edition, desktop Spins) is also going to work on any of the others.
From the user facing app side, if you want to implement support for your company's weird week numbering system in the calendar widget in Fedora Workstation you can do that today. If there were two desktop systems it would be more than twice the work (since you need two distinct dev environments).
From the infrastructure side it is even worse. Red Hat has been very successful using Fedora as the first implementation from things like systemd to PipeWire zero copy screen sharing. I believe that has been aided by the fact that it is possible to do one implementation instead of several. When you see that things work you can make everything "API stable"* and usable by other systems. If you have several desktop systems they will have diverging feature set (as Schaller wrote in his blog post) or development will slow down quite a lot.
You might call this "vendor lock in", but from my perspective things like systemd and PipeWire have been very successful projects that have gotten support from a majority of the free software eco-system. And I think they have been aided by the focus on Fedora and the fact that Fedora Workstation is ONE platform.
/Andreas
*Or how things are suppose to work together, it is hard to find the right words.
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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
-- _______________________________________________ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
