Draft Product Description for Fedora Workstation

[Markus Mayer]

On 11/05/2013 10:33 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Tue, 2013-11-05 at 16:32 -0500, Josh Boyer wrote:
>> On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 4:29 PM, Adam Williamson <awilliam at redhat.com> wrote:
>>> On Tue, 2013-11-05 at 15:23 -0500, Josh Boyer wrote:
>>>> On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 2:58 PM, Adam Williamson <awilliam at redhat.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, 2013-11-01 at 14:22 -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>> - What about watching films, listening to music? I think it is a basic
>>>>>>> requirement for students (at least for me).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Maybe we should add a that a student should be able to play videos and
>>>>>>> listen to music. It should be easy to install required codes
>>>>>>> (free/nonfree/patente) if they are available in the repositories (yes, I
>>>>>>> mean rpmfusion)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This would require approval beyond the WG, as it goes against Fedora's
>>>>>> policies.  Note, I am not saying you are incorrect, just that it's a
>>>>>> conversation to be had elsewhere first.
>>>>>
>>>>> Ensuring that it's possible/easy to install plugins from third party
>>>>> repositories when appropriate if those third party repositories are
>>>>> defined is not, I don't believe, against any policies, or we could not
>>>>> have the automatic codec installation mechanisms in Totem and Rhythmbox.
>>>>> (Which, as I read it, is the kind of thing this comment was about).
>>>>
>>>> The codec search only works if you have repositories configured that
>>>> have packages that match the Provides (as far as I understand).
>>>> Fedora policy says that we do not promote or install such
>>>> repositories.  This is the "don't talk about RPMFusion" rule.
>>>>
>>>> So sure, we can have software that will pull things in if the user has
>>>> done some manual intervention.  We just cant, currently, do that thing
>>>> for them.
>>>
>>> Right, that's exactly what I was saying. I just think this is all the
>>> _original poster_ was talking about, not any kind of automatic
>>> configuration of such repositories. (Or at least, you can read it that
>>> way).
>>
>> OK.  I guess that's fine, but it seems like a non-goal to me.  I mean,
>> it already works that way.  All adding it to the PRD would do would
>> make an easy thing to check off the list as "met".
>
> I suppose we should go back to the OP and ask for clarification of
> exactly what the idea was, at this point :)
>

All I was asking for is the status quo. 3rd party repositories must be 
installed manually, but once they are installed automated codec 
installation should work.