Next meeting is Wednesday, 2015-Feb-18 at 1600 UTC/11:00am US-EST.
Please feel free to suggest additional issues for the agenda if needed, and I'll add them.
* Alpha freeze approaches! 2015-Feb-24 - By this point features should be in a testable state. - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/GNOME3.16 - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/LibinputForXorg - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Login_Screen_Over_Wayland - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/GnomeShell_NewNotifications - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Nautilus_Improvements
* Test Days -- do we want test days for any of these features, or other release criteria? - Current schedule (nothing for desktop yet?): https://apps.fedoraproject.org/calendar/list/QA/?subject=Test+Day
* Privacy policy - Are we blocked at all on Spot talking with ABRT folks about data they are storing? - mattdm's request for uuid + Fedora version + Fedora edition/spin, is there an appropriate place for this in our purview?
On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 10:14 AM, Paul W. Frields stickster@gmail.com wrote:
Next meeting is Wednesday, 2015-Feb-18 at 1600 UTC/11:00am US-EST.
Please feel free to suggest additional issues for the agenda if needed, and I'll add them.
We should discuss whether we need to request changes to Anaconda's new password strength policy [1] [2]. FESCo will consider the issue at their meeting, but I think it would be helpful for them to have a recommendation from the Workstation WG.
[1] https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/1412 [2] https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=735578
Was there ever a decision on the wisdom of opening many ports by default in Fedora 21 Workstation? There was a lot of discussion and I think a bug was filed but I don't recall whether anyone decided to keep this for F22.
On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 10:04 AM, Michael Catanzaro mcatanzaro@gnome.org wrote:
On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 10:14 AM, Paul W. Frields stickster@gmail.com wrote:
Next meeting is Wednesday, 2015-Feb-18 at 1600 UTC/11:00am US-EST. Please feel free to suggest additional issues for the agenda if needed, and I'll add them.
We should discuss whether we need to request changes to Anaconda's new password strength policy [1] [2]. FESCo will consider the issue at their meeting, but I think it would be helpful for them to have a recommendation from the Workstation WG.
[1] https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/1412 [2] https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=735578
-- desktop mailing list desktop@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop
On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 1:08 PM, M. Edward (Ed) Borasky znmeb@znmeb.net wrote:
Was there ever a decision on the wisdom of opening many ports by default in Fedora 21 Workstation? There was a lot of discussion and I think a bug was filed but I don't recall whether anyone decided to keep this for F22.
FESCo decided we can continue to do as we please [1], so those ports will remain open.
On Tue, 2015-02-17 at 11:14 -0500, Paul W. Frields wrote:
Next meeting is Wednesday, 2015-Feb-18 at 1600 UTC/11:00am US-EST.
Please feel free to suggest additional issues for the agenda if needed, and I'll add them.
- Alpha freeze approaches! 2015-Feb-24
- By this point features should be in a testable state.
- https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/GNOME3.16
- https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/LibinputForXorg
- https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Login_Screen_Over_Wayland
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/GnomeShell_NewNotifications
Test Days -- do we want test days for any of these features, or other release criteria?
- Current schedule (nothing for desktop yet?): https://apps.fedoraproject.org/calendar/list/QA/?subject=Test+Day
Privacy policy
- Are we blocked at all on Spot talking with ABRT folks about data they are storing?
- mattdm's request for uuid + Fedora version + Fedora edition/spin, is there an appropriate place for this in our purview?
A topic I would like to start discussing is Workstation vs Atomic. It may be too early to put on the agenda yet. I haven't talked to Colin about it and don't have a very concrete proposal, but I think we should have it on our long-term roadmap that we'll end up with a 3 layer architecture of host (ideally an atomically updated image), runtime and applications (see alex' work on concrete thoughts about the runtime+app layers).
On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 9:46 AM, Matthias Clasen mclasen@redhat.com wrote:
On Tue, 2015-02-17 at 11:14 -0500, Paul W. Frields wrote:
Next meeting is Wednesday, 2015-Feb-18 at 1600 UTC/11:00am US-EST.
Please feel free to suggest additional issues for the agenda if needed, and I'll add them.
- Alpha freeze approaches! 2015-Feb-24
- By this point features should be in a testable state.
- https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/GNOME3.16
- https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/LibinputForXorg
- https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Login_Screen_Over_Wayland
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/GnomeShell_NewNotifications
Test Days -- do we want test days for any of these features, or other release criteria?
- Current schedule (nothing for desktop yet?): https://apps.fedoraproject.org/calendar/list/QA/?subject=Test+Day
Privacy policy
- Are we blocked at all on Spot talking with ABRT folks about data they are storing?
- mattdm's request for uuid + Fedora version + Fedora edition/spin, is there an appropriate place for this in our purview?
A topic I would like to start discussing is Workstation vs Atomic. It may be too early to put on the agenda yet. I haven't talked to Colin about it and don't have a very concrete proposal, but I think we should have it on our long-term roadmap that we'll end up with a 3 layer architecture of host (ideally an atomically updated image), runtime and applications (see alex' work on concrete thoughts about the runtime+app layers).
(I think you meant Workstation + Atomic, not vs. ;) )
I can see that being an option as well, but we really need to figure out the "user wants to locally modify the image" problem. Having to rebuild an entire new Atomic image for Workstation just to install e.g. vim-enhanced system-wide seems excessive. It would also then deviate from the official Workstation Atomic image.
People are used to yum/dnf install working. I think it needs to continue to work in some fashion before we can really look at adopting Atomic. It is an intriguing idea though, and I can see how it would help both QA and the "too many updates" problem.
josh
On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 10:03:23AM -0500, Josh Boyer wrote:
On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 9:46 AM, Matthias Clasen mclasen@redhat.com wrote:
On Tue, 2015-02-17 at 11:14 -0500, Paul W. Frields wrote:
Next meeting is Wednesday, 2015-Feb-18 at 1600 UTC/11:00am US-EST.
Please feel free to suggest additional issues for the agenda if needed, and I'll add them.
- Alpha freeze approaches! 2015-Feb-24
- By this point features should be in a testable state.
- https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/GNOME3.16
- https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/LibinputForXorg
- https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Login_Screen_Over_Wayland
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/GnomeShell_NewNotifications
Test Days -- do we want test days for any of these features, or other release criteria?
- Current schedule (nothing for desktop yet?): https://apps.fedoraproject.org/calendar/list/QA/?subject=Test+Day
Privacy policy
- Are we blocked at all on Spot talking with ABRT folks about data they are storing?
- mattdm's request for uuid + Fedora version + Fedora edition/spin, is there an appropriate place for this in our purview?
A topic I would like to start discussing is Workstation vs Atomic. It may be too early to put on the agenda yet. I haven't talked to Colin about it and don't have a very concrete proposal, but I think we should have it on our long-term roadmap that we'll end up with a 3 layer architecture of host (ideally an atomically updated image), runtime and applications (see alex' work on concrete thoughts about the runtime+app layers).
(I think you meant Workstation + Atomic, not vs. ;) )
I can see that being an option as well, but we really need to figure out the "user wants to locally modify the image" problem. Having to rebuild an entire new Atomic image for Workstation just to install e.g. vim-enhanced system-wide seems excessive. It would also then deviate from the official Workstation Atomic image.
People are used to yum/dnf install working. I think it needs to continue to work in some fashion before we can really look at adopting Atomic. It is an intriguing idea though, and I can see how it would help both QA and the "too many updates" problem.
Agreed that image + apps/package needs to work in some form. Colin's definitely aware of that and IIRC from Brno discussion he's thinking about this and discussing with Alex and others. Doesn't mean we can really solve it in meetings, but I think we need to be tracking progress a bit more closely somehow.
On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 7:03 AM, Josh Boyer jwboyer@fedoraproject.org wrote:
On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 9:46 AM, Matthias Clasen mclasen@redhat.com wrote:
A topic I would like to start discussing is Workstation vs Atomic. It may be too early to put on the agenda yet. I haven't talked to Colin about it and don't have a very concrete proposal, but I think we should have it on our long-term roadmap that we'll end up with a 3 layer architecture of host (ideally an atomically updated image), runtime and applications (see alex' work on concrete thoughts about the runtime+app layers).
(I think you meant Workstation + Atomic, not vs. ;) )
I can see that being an option as well, but we really need to figure out the "user wants to locally modify the image" problem. Having to rebuild an entire new Atomic image for Workstation just to install e.g. vim-enhanced system-wide seems excessive. It would also then deviate from the official Workstation Atomic image.
People are used to yum/dnf install working. I think it needs to continue to work in some fashion before we can really look at adopting Atomic. It is an intriguing idea though, and I can see how it would help both QA and the "too many updates" problem.
josh
desktop mailing list desktop@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop
As a Workstation remixer who is building on Docker and testing Atomic I welcome this discussion. ;-) But a huge part of my targeted user base is on Windows and without a solid partnership for Atomic with Microsoft and Hyper-V, they're going to use Boot2Docker / VirtualBox.
My next release on Fedora 22 may not even be a remix. I'm leaning towards "install Fedora Workstation and run these scripts" rather than creating an ISO and an OVA.
It's not Fedora that's the problem - it's the upstream components that aren't packaged for Fedora / supported on Fedora by the upstream. I may just push that stuff off into Docker images which most likely won't be built on Fedora's Docker image base.
desktop@lists.stg.fedoraproject.org
-
Jakub Filak -
Josh Boyer -
M. Edward (Ed) Borasky -
Matthias Clasen -
Michael Catanzaro -
Paul W. Frields