Call for agenda for Workstation WG meeting 2015-Jun-07
by Paul W. Frields
Next meeting is Monday, 2015-June-07 at 1300 UTC/9:00am US-EDT.
PRD changes/Council report (due 12th!)
* See mcatanzaro proposals on list for PRD changes
* Do we have any other changes?
* Status of existing efforts (mclasen)
Mcatanzaro also made a number of good points for technical work toward
F23/24. However, I think we need to break those apart here on list
and figure out which we (and/or upstream) are pursuing and how. I
think doing that in a meeting isn't super-productive, until we have a
specific question we need to answer.
But still accepting other agenda suggestions here.
--
Paul W. Frields http://paul.frields.org/
gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717
http://redhat.com/ - - - - http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/
The open source story continues to grow: http://opensource.com
8 years, 10 months
Feedback KDE Spin
by Stefano Di Martino
Hi everyone,
I would like to give you some Feedback to the KDE Spin of Fedora.
First, I experienced the KDE spin always as worst KDE integration of all
Linux distributions. Not only because of the visual experience, but also
because of bugs which I didn't experience in other distributions.
I installed KDE 5 on Fedora 21 from a foreign repository. It was a
vanilla KDE. It run smoothly and well and it was beautiful. After I
downloaded the KDE spin of Fedora 22, I not only experienced a visually
ugly KDE with Fedora theme, but bugs, too. I couldn't resize the window
to a custom size. There was no mouse cursor indicating, that I could
resize the window when I moved the mouse cursor the the corner of the
window.
After playing a bit, Fedora just freezed.
I thought, I could give Fedora a try by upgrading it to version 22, but
I am experiencing now a slower KDE start (not boot time) and after
hibernate and resuming, I experienced a freeze again which I hadn't with
Fedora 21 and KDE 5.3 from the foreign repository.
Now my request:
Couldn't you just install a vanilla KDE without any patches which makes
it worse?! That would be great and you would have less work! :)
Best regards,
Stefano
8 years, 10 months
Re: Fedora.next PRD refresh
by cxpcman
Enviado desde Samsung Mobile de Telcel
-------- Original message --------
From: Michael Catanzaro <mcatanzaro(a)gnome.org>
Date: 04/06/2015 7:41 AM (GMT-08:00)
To: desktop(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
Subject: Re: Fedora.next PRD refresh
Proposed changes:
Under Target Audience, General, after "Desktop apps should be
sufficient to make this system the user's only computer," insert a new
paragraph: "Developers are not expected to be familiar with the
terminal. Users should not be required to use the terminal for
essential tasks, including software development."
Under Target Audience, Other users, replace the first sentence with
"While our focus is on creating a top-class developer workstation, our
developer focus will not compromise the aforementioned goal to be a
polished and user friendly system that can appeal to a wide general
audience." Replace the final sentence with "We will welcome feedback
and requests from all our users and will consider accommodating it when
possible."
Under Develop application guidelines and designs, replace the entire
section with "Fedora Workstation follows the GNOME Human Interface
Guidelines. These guidelines are mandatory for applications that are
installed by default. Third-party software developers are encouraged to
follow them too."
Under Delivery Mechanism, replace the final sentence with "The product
will be offered for installation via either live or netinstall ISO
images."
Under Packaging for the Workstation", remove the sentence "No software
will be blocked from being packaged as long as it doesn't break any
part of the core workstation system upon install," or remove the
packaging committee that enforces our quality standards. :)
Comments on other sections:
Robust Upgrades: "Upgrading the system multiple times through the
upgrade process should give a result that is the same as an original
install of Fedora Workstation. Upgrade should be a safe and process
that never leaves the system needing manual intervention." We violated
this rule quite badly for the upgrade from F21 to F22. For example, the
default font on ttys is different for fresh installs than for upgrades,
and fresh installs use xorg-x11-drv-libinput whereas upgrades do not. I
still agree with Owen that this is a desirable goal, so maybe we can
keep it as-is and just accept that we haven't made progress on it yet.
Better upgrade/rollback control: We haven't really made progress on
this, either.
I want to add a section specifying that regular updates should follow
similar QA policies as releases (we can clump the updates together into
monthly updates packs), but I guess that might be controversial.
I'm not sure about the Work Model section. It doesn't seem to
accurately reflect how we operate.
"The working group will also regularly meet with a designated
representative of Red Hat to discuss how Red Hats product and
development plans will affect the Fedora product development and
resource allocation." I guess we don't need to remove this per se,
since Christian kind of fills that role, but it also doesn't seem to
accurately reflect how we operate.
--
desktop mailing list
desktop(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop
8 years, 10 months
Anaconda wishlist
by Michael Catanzaro
Hi,
I put together a desired installation experience wishlist. Let's
discuss and consider forwarding this to the Anaconda developers as a
request.
* Remove the timezone selection spoke. This spoke is redundant with
gnome-initial-setup.
* Remove or simplify the network configuration spoke. In the live
installer, this spoke allows setting only the system hostname, but it
follows different rules for setting the hostname than GNOME/systemd.
The spoke should either follow hostnamed's rules for pretty hostnames
(i.e. allows capital letters, spaces, etc. without any complaint), or
the spoke should be removed. If we keep it, it should allow the user
to set a "computer name" (avoiding technical terminology like
"hostname") and should not include the phrase "network configuration."
* Remove root password configuration. It's confusing how this is
different from the user's admin account password. Advanced users can
set a root password after installation if desired.
* Remove user account creation. This is redundant with gnome-initial
-setup.
* Remove hub and spokes: simply go straight to keyboard layout
selection after language selection, then from there to disk layout,
optionally from there to the hostname panel, and then to the
installation progress panel. This last panel will need a bit of a
redesign, since it will be pretty empty otherwise.
Clearly this is mostly a list of things to remove, rather than things
to add. The goal is to make installation as simple and easy as
possible.
Changes to gnome-initial-setup: Skip language and keyboard layout
selection in user creation mode. These panels cannot reasonably be
removed from Anaconda, so we should use them only in existing user
mode (when a new user account is created after installation). They're
redundant in user creation mode.
This proposal leaves the disk layout spoke untouched, which is the
most confusing portion of the installation experience, but it's more
than enough changes for one release already.
Thoughts?
8 years, 10 months
Significant drop in ABRT reports in F22
by Jiri Eischmann
Hi,
I regularly go through most frequent problems reported to ABRT retrace
server because it helps me prioritize bugs in Fedora that are assigned
to my team.
I've noticed a significant drop in number of reports in Fedora 22.
It's just two weeks before the final release when many early adopters
are already running F22, but the difference in number of reports from
F21 and F22 is huge: 64373:904.
12 days before F21 was released, we collected 16081 reports from this
version. That's almost 18x more. I don't think we're experiencing such
a huge drop in adoption, so I investigated more.
I found out several things which I think are a cause of this:
1) I upgraded my machine, and the new Problem Reporting in Privacy
Settings is set not to do automatic reporting, completely ignoring my
settings in ABRT from F21.
2) I checked settings in ABRT and automatic settings was enabled, so I
thought something was broken because my crashes were not reported
automatically. Then (with the help of Jakub Filak) I found out that
this had been overridden by the new settings in Privacy.
3) Users are no longer asked if they want to enable automatic
reporting when the first crash happens. So unless despite complete
lack of any hints they find their way into Privacy settings their
crashes are not reported. I can no longer even make ureports manually
by clicking on Report in notifications. To report it, I need to do the
full BZ report.
With such a decrease in number of reports, ABRT is much less useful to
developers and I think we should fix it:
* privacy settings should reflect my settings from ABRT after upgrade.
* settings in ABRT and Control Center should be in sync, I understand
that the Privacy is master settings overriding app's settings, but
there is only one app reporting and it's very confusing for users.
* users should be asked if they want to enable automatic reporting
after the first crash like in the last.
Jiri
8 years, 10 months
