On Sat, Jan 22, 2011 at 11:22 PM, Peter Robinson <pbrobinson@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Sat, Jan 22, 2011 at 8:56 PM, Jason D. Clinton <me@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On Sat, Jan 22, 2011 at 14:32, Peter Robinson <pbrobinson@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> >>> Well you'd want to be able to exclude it as well and adding it as an >>> artificial dep to something like gnome-session won't allow it to be >>> removed. >> >> GNOME Shell is the shell of GNOME 3 and thus depending on the GNOME Shell >> from the gnome-session from GNOME 3 is not artificial but rather a >> requirement. The fallback mode is intended as a fallback for driver and VM >> problems, not as first-class desktop environment. You will be allowed to >> force it to use the fallback mode should the detection fail to understand >> your hardware but that's not quite there yet. See here: >> >> http://mail.gnome.org/archives/desktop-devel-list/2011-January/msg00008.html >> >> http://mail.gnome.org/archives/desktop-devel-list/2011-January/msg00138.html >> >> So, doing what you describe from the UI makes a lot more sense (and >> explaining why) from a user perspective than, "If you drivers don't work do >> this magic with the package manager." The former is helpful; the later is >> pain. > > what about users choice? Isn't that what free software is about? https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2008-January/msg00861.html -- test mailing list test@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
