<div dir="ltr">On Sat, Feb 22, 2014 at 12:59 AM, Matthew Garrett <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:mjg59@srcf.ucam.org" target="_blank">mjg59@srcf.ucam.org</a>></span> wrote:<br><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote">
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div class="">On Sat, Feb 22, 2014 at 12:55:59AM +0200, Elad Alfassa wrote:<br>
<br>
> Sharing a tool would be weird.<br>
> It will also confuse the users with too many options.<br>
> If the user just downloaded a tool from fedora, it shouldn't promote Arch<br>
> or SUSE.<br>
<br>
</div>Sharing a tool doesn't prevent branding, it just reduces duplication of<br>
effort.<br>
<span class=""></span><br></blockquote></div>And that's fine as long as the tool's executable will be signed and that it won't show a huge combo-box of distro selection like unetbootin has.<br><br></div><div class="gmail_extra">
I think that before we call for sharing a tool, we should clearly define our requirement from such tool, and then check to see if other distros share the same requirement.<br></div><div class="gmail_extra">If they do, then yes, we can share the tool. If they don't, we should still write such tool for Fedora.<br>
<br><br></div><div class="gmail_extra">I was probably not clear enough in my original message and I apologize for that, I have nothing against sharing tools to reduce work and duplication, <br>but I'm against giving our users a tool that will look like unetbootin in a sense where it has too many options that no new user could ever understand.<br>
<br></div><div class="gmail_extra">I think those are sane requirements for such tool:<br></div><div class="gmail_extra">1) Multiplatform: OSX, Windows and Linux should all be supported by the same tool, or at least the UI should look similar enough<br>
</div><div class="gmail_extra">2) The tool should be able to reliably download and verify an image, or verify an already downloaded image,<br></div><div class="gmail_extra">3) On Windows, we must ship a signed executable for two reasons: the obvious security reason, and the other one is the less obvious one: The windows UAC dialog looks less scary for signed executables.<br>
</div><div class="gmail_extra">4) The tool should be branded.<br></div><div class="gmail_extra">5) The tool should not offer downloads of other distributions.<br></div><div class="gmail_extra">6) As a continuation of 5, the tool should not have any confusing options or toggles<br>
</div><div class="gmail_extra">7) The tool should prevent or make it harder to deploy the image to the wrong device (ie. your hard drive). Ideally it should show only removable devices, and list them by name and size.<br>
</div><div class="gmail_extra"><br>-- <br><div dir="ltr">-Elad Alfassa.</div>
</div></div>