----- Original Message -----
From: "Josh Boyer" jwboyer@fedoraproject.org To: "Discussions about development for the Fedora desktop" desktop@lists.fedoraproject.org Cc: "KDE on Fedora discussion" kde@lists.fedoraproject.org Sent: Wednesday, March 5, 2014 3:29:42 PM Subject: Re: KDE integration/status for Workstation
On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 7:16 AM, Jaroslav Reznik jreznik@redhat.com wrote:
----- Original Message -----
----- Original Message -----
From: "Adam Williamson" awilliam@redhat.com To: "Discussions about development for the Fedora desktop" desktop@lists.fedoraproject.org Sent: Wednesday, March 5, 2014 3:20:06 AM Subject: Re: KDE integration/status for Workstation
On Tue, 2014-03-04 at 19:59 -0500, Josh Boyer wrote:
Hi All,
During the default DE discussions, a number of WG members expressed interest in keeping KDE as a release blocking DE for Workstation. QA is now asking FESCo about KDE's status as well in https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/1243
So if KDE is going to be a release blocking DE for Workstation, we need to figure out how exactly it gets installed and what manner it would be tested in. In the above ticket I came up with the following:
install the Workstation live image, install KDE through software-installer (if necessary), log into KDE from GDM after install, test
However, that was entirely off the top of my head. Would the live image be large enough to contain the KDE Workstation already or would a user/QA tester need to install it through the software-installer? What tests should be done? Etc.
Thoughts?
This with my Personal Opinion hat on, not representing QA:
I'm not sure all/most people who actually want to use Fedora KDE are likely to be sold on doing it by downloading what they will see as 'GNOME', installing that, and then installing KDE on top of it. I think this will be fine for some folks, but there'll be a significant constituency which just wants a KDE image.
In fact we might be creating a bit of a problem, because I can see both "want KDE as an alternative desktop on top of the Workstation product" and "just want Fedora KDE" as two entirely legitimate and viable constituencies, which sort of means we've just created a bunch of extra work for ourselves. I'm not sure I see a clever magical solution to that, though. Engage brain cells... --
Well my take is that there will never be a solution that makes everyone happy, but in my mind the expectation here has always been that the people who would not be happy about the proposed solution would end up focusing their energy on doing a remix. Because there isn't really a way we can make a product and at the same time be a solution for people who essentially want a different product.
Yep, and that probably leads back to the question if we want or don't want to provide more products than we currently have so far (three). And to be honest, I like idea having more products but with very high bar (that should apply for all products) - to avoid a situation of having dozens of products but still be inclusive.
All of your subsequent email is perfectly fine, but this thread is focused on what we want to do with KDE in the Workstation product. If you want to advocate for a KDE product, please take that discussion to the devel list. I don't want to derail this conversation, and this list isn't the right place to discuss what you're suggesting.
CC'ing KDE mailing list. Due to some other stuff, I'm not very active recently in discussion but initially KDE SIG was more inclined to own product, then I saw a few people more inclined being part of WS WG and now I think it's clearly steering back to spin/product. Remix would be suicide - even KDE SIG is pretty big team, active, with healthy community, it would mean a lot of duplication etc.
I think Christian actually meant spin, not remix, in the Fedora definition of those terms.
I actually did mean remix, but it of course do boil down to what spin vs remix actually ends up meaning. I do realize that they are both somewhat loosely defined terms with different people putting different meaning to them.
So in general I am strongly against a proliferation of products in the sense that I see the general Fedora download experience to be a page presenting you with 3 easily identifiable and zero overlap options (desktop, server, clould). One could argue that one could add a few more options there for other clearly distinct usecases, but in general if the page turns into a long list of options, we have lost the point doing the products to begin with.
Remixes for me is more along the lines of what is happening in the Ubuntu world, where all remixes/spins or whatever you want to call them are branded separately, making the distinction clear of what is the core product and what is derivatives. (That said I would suggest we do not do the alternative branding along the same lines as Ubuntu did making them all variations of the Fedora name.)
Anyway, I guess this discussion belongs on -devel and not here.
Christian