Greetings,
The Live images created for F-13-Beta-TC1 desktop are over 700 Mib. This means they no longer fit on a CD image. I've read several posts noting the intent to have larger desktop live images to offer more software on the image. I'm just looking to confirm that this is an intended behavior so we can update our test case [1].
Is this due to the DesktopLiveImageTarget [2] feature that I see in the upcoming release notes [3]?
Thanks, James
[1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_Mediakit_ISO_Size [2] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/DesktopLiveImageTarget [3] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Docs/Beats/Desktop#From_Live_CD.27s_to_Live_US...
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 12:16 PM, James Laska jlaska@redhat.com wrote:
Greetings,
The Live images created for F-13-Beta-TC1 desktop are over 700 Mib. This means they no longer fit on a CD image. I've read several posts noting the intent to have larger desktop live images to offer more software on the image. I'm just looking to confirm that this is an intended behavior so we can update our test case [1].
Is this due to the DesktopLiveImageTarget [2] feature that I see in the
Yes this was intentional ... welcome to the year 2010 ;)
On Wed, 2010-03-24 at 07:16 -0400, James Laska wrote:
Greetings,
The Live images created for F-13-Beta-TC1 desktop are over 700 Mib. This means they no longer fit on a CD image. I've read several posts noting the intent to have larger desktop live images to offer more software on the image. I'm just looking to confirm that this is an intended behavior so we can update our test case [1].
Is this due to the DesktopLiveImageTarget [2] feature that I see in the upcoming release notes [3]?
Thanks, James
[1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_Mediakit_ISO_Size [2] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/DesktopLiveImageTarget [3] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Docs/Beats/Desktop#From_Live_CD.27s_to_Live_US...
So the new size limit for desktop live images will be 1G or 1Gib?
Thanks, James
On Wed, 2010-03-24 at 13:21 -0400, Adam Jackson wrote:
On Wed, 2010-03-24 at 09:50 -0400, James Laska wrote:
So the new size limit for desktop live images will be 1G or 1Gib?
1GiB. 2^30, not 10^9.
Why? It seems backwards to use 1GiB instead of 1GB - most 1GB USB sticks only hold 1GB, not 1GiB. And the whole point of this excursion was to fit on 1GB USB sticks. Well, one of the points anyway.
Anyway, it still seems to me that these two statements are still true
a) 2GB sticks are not really more expensive than 1GB sticks (see list archives for other people seconding this impression)
b) we're already low on space for 1GB/1GiB and we don't even have anything like hires Theora videos yet. And we want to leave some space for a persistent overlay.
Also, I think I've asked this twice on this list already... without anyone caring to respond. Matthias, Colin, please respond...
David
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 6:59 PM, David Zeuthen davidz@redhat.com wrote:
On Wed, 2010-03-24 at 13:21 -0400, Adam Jackson wrote:
On Wed, 2010-03-24 at 09:50 -0400, James Laska wrote:
So the new size limit for desktop live images will be 1G or 1Gib?
1GiB. 2^30, not 10^9.
Why? It seems backwards to use 1GiB instead of 1GB - most 1GB USB sticks only hold 1GB, not 1GiB. And the whole point of this excursion was to fit on 1GB USB sticks. Well, one of the points anyway.
Anyway, it still seems to me that these two statements are still true
a) 2GB sticks are not really more expensive than 1GB sticks (see list archives for other people seconding this impression)
Not speaking for the whole world of course but here in Austria finding a 1GB stick seems hard (only one listed on a big price comparison site).
It costs 6.50 € while the cheapest 2GB costs 6.70 € ... so 1GB sticks are basically dead here.
On Wed, 2010-03-24 at 13:59 -0400, David Zeuthen wrote:
On Wed, 2010-03-24 at 13:21 -0400, Adam Jackson wrote:
On Wed, 2010-03-24 at 09:50 -0400, James Laska wrote:
So the new size limit for desktop live images will be 1G or 1Gib?
1GiB. 2^30, not 10^9.
Why? It seems backwards to use 1GiB instead of 1GB - most 1GB USB sticks only hold 1GB, not 1GiB. And the whole point of this excursion was to fit on 1GB USB sticks. Well, one of the points anyway.
None of the sticks I've seen. But I'll trust your expertise.
- ajax
On Wed, 2010-03-24 at 13:59 -0400, David Zeuthen wrote:
On Wed, 2010-03-24 at 13:21 -0400, Adam Jackson wrote:
On Wed, 2010-03-24 at 09:50 -0400, James Laska wrote:
So the new size limit for desktop live images will be 1G or 1Gib?
1GiB. 2^30, not 10^9.
Why? It seems backwards to use 1GiB instead of 1GB - most 1GB USB sticks only hold 1GB, not 1GiB. And the whole point of this excursion was to fit on 1GB USB sticks. Well, one of the points anyway.
Anyway, it still seems to me that these two statements are still true
a) 2GB sticks are not really more expensive than 1GB sticks (see list archives for other people seconding this impression)
b) we're already low on space for 1GB/1GiB and we don't even have anything like hires Theora videos yet. And we want to leave some space for a persistent overlay.
Also, I think I've asked this twice on this list already... without anyone caring to respond. Matthias, Colin, please respond...
My understanding was that 1GB would be 'up to 1GB of data' - if you want a persistent overlay, use a bigger stick... leaving room for a usefully-sized overlay within 1GB would seem to clash with the additional size requirements for OpenOffice alone.
Matthias
On Wed, 2010-03-24 at 13:21 -0400, Adam Jackson wrote:
On Wed, 2010-03-24 at 09:50 -0400, James Laska wrote:
So the new size limit for desktop live images will be 1G or 1Gib?
1GiB. 2^30, not 10^9.
Hmm. That seems inconsistent. I believe the idea was to target '1GB' USB sticks; aren't USB sticks usually sold using the base-10 numbers, for the same reason as hard disks (to inflate apparent capacity)?
Would a 1 GiB image actually fit on your typical '1GB' USB stick?
On Wed, 2010-03-24 at 11:18 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Wed, 2010-03-24 at 13:21 -0400, Adam Jackson wrote:
On Wed, 2010-03-24 at 09:50 -0400, James Laska wrote:
So the new size limit for desktop live images will be 1G or 1Gib?
1GiB. 2^30, not 10^9.
Hmm. That seems inconsistent. I believe the idea was to target '1GB' USB sticks; aren't USB sticks usually sold using the base-10 numbers, for the same reason as hard disks (to inflate apparent capacity)?
Would a 1 GiB image actually fit on your typical '1GB' USB stick?
Probably not. The majority of "1GB sticks" are 1000MB (1,000,000,000 bytes), a few are actually 1024MB (1,024,000,000 bytes). FWIW, I've never seen anything larger than that - e.g. 1000MiB (1,048,576,000 bytes) or 1GiB (1,073,741,824 bytes). But I'm sure if you look long enough, these do exist!
The whole point is kinda moot since we will need some space for a persistent overlay *anyway*. So even if a "1GB stick" could hold 1074MB (e.g. 1GiB) then we'd want more than 74MB for the persistent overlay.
It's also a nice gesture to leave some wiggle room for 3rd party Fedora respins...
David
On Wed, 2010-03-24 at 14:28 -0400, David Zeuthen wrote:
The whole point is kinda moot since we will need some space for a persistent overlay *anyway*. So even if a "1GB stick" could hold 1074MB (e.g. 1GiB) then we'd want more than 74MB for the persistent overlay.
Sure, but it's not entirely moot, because if we decide we want, oh, 150MB for the permanent overlay, that means we should target 850MB, not 924MB...
On Wed, 2010-03-24 at 11:35 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Wed, 2010-03-24 at 14:28 -0400, David Zeuthen wrote:
The whole point is kinda moot since we will need some space for a persistent overlay *anyway*. So even if a "1GB stick" could hold 1074MB (e.g. 1GiB) then we'd want more than 74MB for the persistent overlay.
Sure, but it's not entirely moot, because if we decide we want, oh, 150MB for the permanent overlay, that means we should target 850MB, not 924MB...
I thought we were targeting about 1G of download size, not 1G USB sticks.
On Wed, 2010-03-24 at 18:47 -0700, Jesse Keating wrote:
On Wed, 2010-03-24 at 11:35 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Wed, 2010-03-24 at 14:28 -0400, David Zeuthen wrote:
The whole point is kinda moot since we will need some space for a persistent overlay *anyway*. So even if a "1GB stick" could hold 1074MB (e.g. 1GiB) then we'd want more than 74MB for the persistent overlay.
Sure, but it's not entirely moot, because if we decide we want, oh, 150MB for the permanent overlay, that means we should target 850MB, not 924MB...
I thought we were targeting about 1G of download size, not 1G USB sticks.
It seems to me no-one's entirely clear on what we're targeting =). The discussion a few months back certainly started out by talking about USB stick sizes, though.
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 07:16:34AM -0400, James Laska wrote:
Greetings,
The Live images created for F-13-Beta-TC1 desktop are over 700 Mib. This means they no longer fit on a CD image. I've read several posts noting the intent to have larger desktop live images to offer more software on the image. I'm just looking to confirm that this is an intended behavior so we can update our test case [1].
Is this due to the DesktopLiveImageTarget [2] feature that I see in the upcoming release notes [3]?
Thanks, James
[1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_Mediakit_ISO_Size [2] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/DesktopLiveImageTarget [3] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Docs/Beats/Desktop#From_Live_CD.27s_to_Live_US...
Yes, that's correct -- the default image is intended to be over 700 MiB now.
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 7:16 AM, James Laska jlaska@redhat.com wrote:
Greetings,
The Live images created for F-13-Beta-TC1 desktop are over 700 Mib. This means they no longer fit on a CD image. I've read several posts noting the intent to have larger desktop live images to offer more software on the image. I'm just looking to confirm that this is an intended behavior so we can update our test case [1].
Is this due to the DesktopLiveImageTarget [2] feature that I see in the upcoming release notes [3]?
Ok so we have to come to some sort of clear final decision here, and I'd appreciate input from stakeholders. Let me outline the options as they stand at this very moment, with some commentary on engineering time that could be spent to fix issues with each one.
o Have two images - Advantages: * If you have a USB key, the experience is improved since it includes OpenOffice. - Disadvantages: * Website is more confusing * Space/QA concerns - Engineering time could be spent on: * Website?
o Go back to 700MB image - Advantages: * Was previous status quo, is well understood * Honestly, it's a question in my mind for how many people it's too onerous to download OpenOffice after they install if they actually use it - Disadvantages: * Not quite the full experience, and has the drawback of the removal of bits like NFS - Engineering time could be spent on: * Adding some code to install @gnome-desktop @office afterwards via e.g. PackageKit UI * Adding "stub" .desktop files to image which install OpenOffice on demand
o Only use ~1G image - Advantages: * No website confusion * It's pretty complete, includes OpenOffice and NFS for example - Disadvantages: * We haven't shipped a 1G image before and the risks are not well quantified * If someone wants a CD, then they'd be fairly confused why the desktop looks really different and ships a different web browser, etc.
o Have two images
- Advantages:
- If you have a USB key, the experience is improved since it
includes OpenOffice.
- Disadvantages:
- Website is more confusing
- Space/QA concerns
- Engineering time could be spent on:
- Website?
o Go back to 700MB image
- Advantages:
- Was previous status quo, is well understood
- Honestly, it's a question in my mind for how many people it's
too onerous to download OpenOffice after they install if they actually use it
- Disadvantages:
- Not quite the full experience, and has the drawback of the
removal of bits like NFS
- Engineering time could be spent on:
- Adding some code to install @gnome-desktop @office afterwards
via e.g. PackageKit UI * Adding "stub" .desktop files to image which install OpenOffice on demand
o Only use ~1G image
- Advantages:
- No website confusion
- It's pretty complete, includes OpenOffice and NFS for example
- Disadvantages:
- We haven't shipped a 1G image before and the risks are not well quantified
- If someone wants a CD, then they'd be fairly confused why the
desktop looks really different and ships a different web browser, etc.
Newbie to list.
I can only say what I think you all already know:
Last week I downloaded the F12 live CD and the Ubuntu 9.12 Live CD.
I didn't pass on the F12 live CD. As a marketing tool for the desktop, the F12 CD is very vanilla and doesn't much show off Fedora on the desktop.
Knowing what Fedora can do for me and I what I can do on the desktop with it, and what it entails to set up via a traditional install, I think that with the current Live CD people would either be totally unimpressed and move on to the competition, or go through all the usual growing pains to get it work and wonder why they bothered with the Live CD (in its current state) in the first place. And that's being polite.
I think that the "1 gig" (see below) live image needs to be a showcase "of some sort", just as Fedora itself is a showcase of the newest free software. I would suggest that it's the desktop that needs to be showcased, but that's just me; however, Fedora being a general purpose distro, it could, due to image size constraints, have two or three images (ie. desktop, server, multimedia, etc.).
Obviously the key here, from this past week's discussions, is to consider accessibility (ie. a "1 gig" USB key, whatever its true size in bytes may be, is a fairly accessible thing these days, and DVDs). The minimum size should probably be some lowest common denominator, ie. 1000 x 1000 x 1000 (as opposed to 1024 x 1024 x 1024), after which it likely should be just a live image of a relatively full set distro on a DVD image.
Ultimately, to avoid confusion, the "relatively full install on a live DVD" (or whatever image decided upon, that would only be hindered by the size of the DVD) might be the least confusing and avoid having too many subgroups dividing up the engineering talent in order to make multiple live images. The move to a larger minimum size appears to implicitly meant to do exactly that, instead of having a bunch of sub-groups trying to squeeze out every package irrelevant to their sub-group's goal in order to produce 31 flavours, each of which would fit on a CD but which might only showcase how to do email on one, web browsing on another, etc., and not really give Fedora as a whole a good review.
My CAD $0.02.
Hello, Interesting one question raised regarding the LiveCD as is, why would someone install using the LiveCD and have to do much work to get all that is possible with fedora working. My answer is something I was planning to bring up as a separate topic, accessibility tools for those with disabilities (eg. the blind). Currently the LiveCD is about the most accessible install for the blind, however there are a few problems which I feel can be overcome relatively easily (this is compared with the work it might need to make the standard install discs accessible). I probably will discuss the points in much greater detail in a new topic, but here is a brief list:
* How does a blind person know when the LiveCD has booted? Waiting for the CD to stop is not a good solution as it may stop when the GDM login screen appears and before the timeout is reached, and anyway a USB drive doesn't make noise like a CD drive so makes that impossible. My suggestion, have a login sound (there is an app in the start up for this but it seems there is no sound in the theme associated to the event). * As the installer uses extra permissions it is inaccessible as fedora LiveCD is not configured for accessible admin apps. Solution would be to write a /etc/orbitrc file to allow this. * The TTS provided is festival, possibly slow to respond, may be bulky and only in english. If espeak was the default TTS it would solve these issues (it may need some alterations to package dependencies). * The dreaded firstboot app, this is inaccessible as it runs outside the normal gnome session (I have actually launched firstboot inside gnome and it seems reasonably accessible, its more that the accessibility framework (at-spi and screen reader need loading around it). Alternatively if all firstboot stuff could be done in the installer on the LiveCD it could solve the issue (most other distros don't seem to need firstboot). * A few issues in how orca behaves with the installer. These are possibly minor as either the user can puzzle it out with flat review or by being patient (eg. location selection orca responds painfully slow in the combo box, may be this could be split into two smaller lists, one for continent and one for country).
Probably you would be interested in a little about me. I am a blind linux user (using linux for over 5 years now). I have to say that Linux is very good for me, partly as it doesn't have the high costs of commercial accessibility solutions as found on windows, but also that Linux accessibility actually offers me greater freedom as it allows me to install the system from scratch and do all the maintenance independently. I recently decided to have a look at fedora. While some community members have made a speakup (a text console screen reader) modified fedora install disc, as it uses the text based installer it has serious limitations (having to clean off the whole hard drive). For this reason I looked at the LiveCD, and while the accessibility experience in general is fairly good, there are some serious issues which make the install process more complicated than it should be (firstboot is probably the biggest problem from the user perspective). This is quite disappointing from such a major Linux distribution, a number of other distributions don't have this issue (opensuse, opensolaris (admittedly not Linux), I believe ubuntu and a handful of less well known distributions). I would be willing to help with solving some of the issues but I don't know how much I could do on my own.
Michael Whapples On 01/-10/-28163 08:59 PM, Donald Buchan wrote:
o Have two images
- Advantages:
- If you have a USB key, the experience is improved since it
includes OpenOffice.
- Disadvantages:
- Website is more confusing
- Space/QA concerns
- Engineering time could be spent on:
- Website?
o Go back to 700MB image
- Advantages:
- Was previous status quo, is well understood
- Honestly, it's a question in my mind for how many people it's
too onerous to download OpenOffice after they install if they actually use it
- Disadvantages:
- Not quite the full experience, and has the drawback of the
removal of bits like NFS
- Engineering time could be spent on:
- Adding some code to install @gnome-desktop @office afterwards
via e.g. PackageKit UI * Adding "stub" .desktop files to image which install OpenOffice on demand
o Only use ~1G image
- Advantages:
- No website confusion
- It's pretty complete, includes OpenOffice and NFS for example
- Disadvantages:
- We haven't shipped a 1G image before and the risks are not well quantified
- If someone wants a CD, then they'd be fairly confused why the
desktop looks really different and ships a different web browser, etc.
Newbie to list.
I can only say what I think you all already know:
Last week I downloaded the F12 live CD and the Ubuntu 9.12 Live CD.
I didn't pass on the F12 live CD. As a marketing tool for the desktop, the F12 CD is very vanilla and doesn't much show off Fedora on the desktop.
Knowing what Fedora can do for me and I what I can do on the desktop with it, and what it entails to set up via a traditional install, I think that with the current Live CD people would either be totally unimpressed and move on to the competition, or go through all the usual growing pains to get it work and wonder why they bothered with the Live CD (in its current state) in the first place. And that's being polite.
I think that the "1 gig" (see below) live image needs to be a showcase "of some sort", just as Fedora itself is a showcase of the newest free software. I would suggest that it's the desktop that needs to be showcased, but that's just me; however, Fedora being a general purpose distro, it could, due to image size constraints, have two or three images (ie. desktop, server, multimedia, etc.).
Obviously the key here, from this past week's discussions, is to consider accessibility (ie. a "1 gig" USB key, whatever its true size in bytes may be, is a fairly accessible thing these days, and DVDs). The minimum size should probably be some lowest common denominator, ie. 1000 x 1000 x 1000 (as opposed to 1024 x 1024 x 1024), after which it likely should be just a live image of a relatively full set distro on a DVD image.
Ultimately, to avoid confusion, the "relatively full install on a live DVD" (or whatever image decided upon, that would only be hindered by the size of the DVD) might be the least confusing and avoid having too many subgroups dividing up the engineering talent in order to make multiple live images. The move to a larger minimum size appears to implicitly meant to do exactly that, instead of having a bunch of sub-groups trying to squeeze out every package irrelevant to their sub-group's goal in order to produce 31 flavours, each of which would fit on a CD but which might only showcase how to do email on one, web browsing on another, etc., and not really give Fedora as a whole a good review.
My CAD $0.02.
On Fri, 2010-03-26 at 17:50 -0400, Colin Walters wrote:
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 7:16 AM, James Laska jlaska@redhat.com wrote:
Greetings,
The Live images created for F-13-Beta-TC1 desktop are over 700 Mib. This means they no longer fit on a CD image. I've read several posts noting the intent to have larger desktop live images to offer more software on the image. I'm just looking to confirm that this is an intended behavior so we can update our test case [1].
Is this due to the DesktopLiveImageTarget [2] feature that I see in the upcoming release notes [3]?
Ok so we have to come to some sort of clear final decision here, and I'd appreciate input from stakeholders. Let me outline the options as they stand at this very moment, with some commentary on engineering time that could be spent to fix issues with each one.
o Have two images
- Advantages:
- If you have a USB key, the experience is improved since it
includes OpenOffice.
- Disadvantages:
- Website is more confusing
- Space/QA concerns
- Engineering time could be spent on:
- Website?
o Go back to 700MB image
- Advantages:
- Was previous status quo, is well understood
- Honestly, it's a question in my mind for how many people it's
too onerous to download OpenOffice after they install if they actually use it
- Disadvantages:
- Not quite the full experience, and has the drawback of the
removal of bits like NFS
- Engineering time could be spent on:
- Adding some code to install @gnome-desktop @office afterwards
via e.g. PackageKit UI * Adding "stub" .desktop files to image which install OpenOffice on demand
o Only use ~1G image
- Advantages:
- No website confusion
- It's pretty complete, includes OpenOffice and NFS for example
- Disadvantages:
- We haven't shipped a 1G image before and the risks are not well quantified
- If someone wants a CD, then they'd be fairly confused why the
desktop looks really different and ships a different web browser, etc.
Hey Colin, thanks for summarizing the pros and cons nicely. I think at this point of the F13 cycle, we should probably play it safe and revert to using a CD sized image. It pains me a bit to say so, but we didn't really get the time and attention this cycle to really make the larger image a sufficiently better experience to justify the change.
I could see us shipping the 1GB image for usb sticks in addition to the CD sized image, but I think rel-eng does not like that idea very much.
All is not lost though, and I do think that we've gotten quite a bit done here that will help us to improve our offerings: The default installation that you get from the DVD is much closer to the desktop spin now, and the live cd is just our desired experience minus things that don't fit.
Future directions for this should IMO include:
- Make it easy to 'complete the installation' after doing a live cd install (e.g. in the PK ui, as Colin mentioned)
- Keep pushing anaconda towards being just an application, and use a live installer on the DVD as well
Matthias
On Mon, Apr 05, 2010 at 09:47:45AM -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote:
On Fri, 2010-03-26 at 17:50 -0400, Colin Walters wrote:
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 7:16 AM, James Laska jlaska@redhat.com wrote:
Greetings,
The Live images created for F-13-Beta-TC1 desktop are over 700 Mib. This means they no longer fit on a CD image. I've read several posts noting the intent to have larger desktop live images to offer more software on the image. I'm just looking to confirm that this is an intended behavior so we can update our test case [1].
Is this due to the DesktopLiveImageTarget [2] feature that I see in the upcoming release notes [3]?
Ok so we have to come to some sort of clear final decision here, and I'd appreciate input from stakeholders. Let me outline the options as they stand at this very moment, with some commentary on engineering time that could be spent to fix issues with each one.
o Have two images
- Advantages:
- If you have a USB key, the experience is improved since it
includes OpenOffice.
- Disadvantages:
- Website is more confusing
- Space/QA concerns
- Engineering time could be spent on:
- Website?
o Go back to 700MB image
- Advantages:
- Was previous status quo, is well understood
- Honestly, it's a question in my mind for how many people it's
too onerous to download OpenOffice after they install if they actually use it
- Disadvantages:
- Not quite the full experience, and has the drawback of the
removal of bits like NFS
- Engineering time could be spent on:
- Adding some code to install @gnome-desktop @office afterwards
via e.g. PackageKit UI * Adding "stub" .desktop files to image which install OpenOffice on demand
o Only use ~1G image
- Advantages:
- No website confusion
- It's pretty complete, includes OpenOffice and NFS for example
- Disadvantages:
- We haven't shipped a 1G image before and the risks are not well quantified
- If someone wants a CD, then they'd be fairly confused why the
desktop looks really different and ships a different web browser, etc.
Hey Colin, thanks for summarizing the pros and cons nicely. I think at this point of the F13 cycle, we should probably play it safe and revert to using a CD sized image. It pains me a bit to say so, but we didn't really get the time and attention this cycle to really make the larger image a sufficiently better experience to justify the change.
I could see us shipping the 1GB image for usb sticks in addition to the CD sized image, but I think rel-eng does not like that idea very much.
All is not lost though, and I do think that we've gotten quite a bit done here that will help us to improve our offerings: The default installation that you get from the DVD is much closer to the desktop spin now, and the live cd is just our desired experience minus things that don't fit.
Future directions for this should IMO include:
- Make it easy to 'complete the installation' after doing a live cd
install (e.g. in the PK ui, as Colin mentioned)
- Keep pushing anaconda towards being just an application, and use a
live installer on the DVD as well
Can I ask for someone in the Desktop crew who helped make the call to do a short post to the Planet about it? Ambassadors probably will want to know from the perspective of both cost of media production (i.e. budgeting), and in terms of discs they plan to order locally/regionally.
I'm behind in my RSS a bit, so if this already got out there, my apologies for being redundant. :-)
desktop@lists.fedoraproject.org