Kevin Kofler wrote:
Matthias Clasen <mclasen <at> redhat.com> writes:
Sure, here you go: a display manager is a security sensitive piece of
code. Shipping multiple just because their names start with a letter you
don't like is not a smart move, because you end up doing twice the
security errata.
Please don't make up excuses to fight the desires of the KDE SIG. The fact is:
* The KDE spin already defaults to KDM. This is not a mistake, but an
intentional decision.
* As far as I know, the KDE SIG members who expressed an opinion on this issue
all want KDM as the default for KDE on the DVD too.
* I'm definitely one of these.
* Rex Dieter, who started that whole KDE SIG, wants that, too. See the October
9 meeting log: http://repo.calcforge.org/temp/fedora-kde-sig-2007-10-09.txt
Now how to implement this technically is another issue (I don't see what's the
big problem with having XDM in Base X and GDM/KDM in the respective desktop
environment groups, but there's surely other solutions too!), but saying KDM is
not desirable at all is something we don't agree to.
We should get to the point where we have one login manager, and just
swap out the toolkits/UI. Logging in is something that we seriously
should not have multiple packages for.
See the work that William Jon Mcann is doing upstream right now to help
get to the goal of a more generic login manager. However, because we
aren't aiming to be bug for bug compatible with KDM (we're not even
aiming to be bug for bug compat with GDM), the KDM upstream guys are not
interested in participating. Maybe instead of fighting within Fedora,
we can redirect the discussion to convince the KDM guys that this is a
good idea.
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
