Re: F41 Change Proposal: Fedora Miracle Spin (self-contained)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Wed, Apr 24, 2024 at 10:33:51PM -0500, Neal Gompa wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 24, 2024 at 3:26 PM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
> <zbyszek@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Apr 24, 2024 at 04:57:40PM +0100, Aoife Moloney wrote:
> > > Wiki - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/FedoraMiracle
> >
> > > {{package|miracle-wm}} is available in Fedora Linux 40, so it can be
> > > installed on top of something like the existing Sway spin and
> > > configured to reuse much of the tools used there.
> > >
> > > For Fedora Linux 41, once the spin is produced, people can download
> > > and try the experience intended to be released.
> >
> > I applaud people trying out new window managers and doing stuff with
> > Fedora. But the overhead of creating and distributing a spin is quite
> > high… It seems that the contents of this spin would overlap very
> > strongly with Sway Spin. Would it make sense to combine them and
> > allow users to easily select one or the other? Even during boot, there
> > could be two boot menu entries and we could provide simple instructions
> > to switch between the desktops on an installed system.
> >
> 
> Aside from actually being unintuitive and confusing to people to smush
> two spins together like that, the experience will eventually differ
> because different tools will be used.

What tools?

> Also, you overestimate the burden of creating a spin. Aside from
> comps, kickstart definitions, and pungi config being done initially
> (which isn't too high to begin with either), the effort required to
> maintain a spin image is extremely low.

There's also the effort of distribuiting and archiving a few
additional gigabytes, putting up the links on the website and browsing
through them, some additional time and and additional step that can
fail during builds…

> A large chunk of our spins are essentially semi-automatic these days,
> and people don't really notice because at the end of the day, it's a
> bundle of things configured together.

Yes. And my point is that we can come up with a hundred or a thousands
of such bundle definitions, and my question is whether we should
create a separate deliverable for each possible definition.

Zbyszek
--
_______________________________________________
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




[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Users]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora Testing]     [Fedora Formulas]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kernel Development]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Desktop]     [PAM]     [Red Hat Development]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]

  Powered by Linux