On Fri, 2015-08-07 at 13:42 -0400, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Fri, Aug 07, 2015 at 10:22:56AM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: > > What I *can't* find is any reference for the justification usually > > cited for the criterion. Several times we mention that there was an > > actual case where people downloaded an Alpha or Beta then got > > confused > > because the background was the same as the previous stable release, > > but > > I've been searching for 15 mins and can't find it. This is probably > > just because it's a difficult thing to search for, though. > > > > It's worth noting that we used to use considerably more 'striking' > > desktop backgrounds than we currently do; the last few releases > > have > > all been fairly subtle variations on the theme of 'abstract shapes > > in > > Fedora blue', really. > > Here's a thought: maybe the Fedora background logo GNOME Shell plugin > could detect if running on an Alpha/Beta release (or on Rawhide) and > change appropriately? Which is fine and dandy on a GNOME/Workstation system, but doesn't help KDE at all.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- test mailing list test@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
