Don't blame LSB and standards, please: was: Re: Fedora Plasma Product, feedback please

[Christian Schaller]

Sure, but considering that such a requirements list would include a lot
of look and feel, behavior, system service usage, developer API availability
 and so on, it would in some cases require quite radical code changes in the 
respective desktops.

And we could change the requirement in the Workstation for Qt5 to be available
to instead say 'there has to be an implementation of the Qt5 API available', which opens up
for people to write their own implementations, but I don't see it as a very realistic 
thing for anyone to do or an especially worthwhile one.

Christian



----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" <johannbg at gmail.com>
> To: advisory-board at lists.fedoraproject.org
> Sent: Tuesday, April 1, 2014 11:59:02 AM
> Subject: Re: Don't blame LSB and standards, please: was: Re: Fedora Plasma	Product, feedback please
> 
> 
> On 04/01/2014 08:22 AM, Christian Schaller wrote:
> > The 3 bullet points in my previous emails explains exactly why it should
> > fail.
> 
> No it does not.
> 
> Workstation can easily implement something like "To become a workstation
> product you have to do X Y Z steps" which each DE we ship in the
> distribution can do encase they want to become a workstation product
> just like is needed to become a server role.
> 
> Once they have done what is needed to fulfill the workstation standard
> they become an official workstation product for the distribution and can
> be advertised as such.
> 
> JBG
> _______________________________________________
> advisory-board mailing list
> advisory-board at lists.fedoraproject.org
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/advisory-board