9:42 a.m.
Fedora Core 5 is a truly amazing OS and one I think has the potential to
really do great things. Looking forward to what the Fedora Project has the
potential to do, especially with its new focus I decided to give some
suggestions as to what could possibly be done starting with Fedora 6 and
onward. Some of my suggestions are definitely based on the OS itself but
others are also concerning the general focus and outlook of the Fedora
Project itself. I hope my suggestion are not regarded as offensive in anyway
and they are only meant to highlight the greatness of Fedora as well as to
reflect my strong desire to see this project take off and propel the Linux
OS to new heights.
First suggestions has to do with the software side of things. We users need
a competent software installer which is graphical based. One that functions
much the same way that the windows installer works. This installer should
track dependencies naturally and place icons on the desktop or give the
option to have icons for the software just installed to be placed on the
desktop of the user as well as in the applications menu. Also when watching
the Boston Linux conference the suggestion was made to offer a hard disc
manager much like windows offers for formating and receiving hard drivers
etc after installation.
My second set of suggestions will deal with the over all focus and structure
of the fedora project. I was listening to a pod cast interview with the head
of the fedora project where in, the topic came up of some how generating
revenue to put back into the project and make it more self sufficient. So I
have a few suggestions which I think the Redhat company itself should take
note of. Firstly Redhat while promoting Linux among enthusiast is also in
the business of making money. On that front I believe that they should not
only attempt to evangelize Linux in the government, education, and corporate
sectors; they should also attempt to get Linux in each and every home. The
reason being is if people are starting to use Linux in their homes and they
are comfortable with it, employers will be more likely and willing to deploy
a operating system which is different in many ways to windows on the
interactive level. Reason being is when people have to stop to learn new
technology this cuts down on productivity and as a person who works for a IT
department in a major university I can also vouch for the fact a IT team
will not be willing to suggest an infrastructure restructuring when they
know, supporting users on something foreign to them is going to increase
their workload 10 fold. So bottom line, more users both advanced,
intermediate and beginners need to be converted to the Linux faithful but
now the question becomes how?
The Fedora project is the perfect tool for this and here is how. The fedora
team should focus SOLELY on making the operating system run as smoothly and
as fast as possible, interacting with a HUGE number of hardware
configurations. Installation needs to be as smooth as silk and upgrading
needs to be fail proof from version to version. Previously installed drives
with personal user data needs to be able to be retained without fail from
upgrade to upgrade if the user isn't doing a clean install. Now I would like
to move on to "partnerships" Fedora project should look into making
"partners" or some other creative term to define other Linux projects and
organizations. In this partnership Fedora will tightly enforce standards
which will ensure that any software created to run on fedora is following
say the OIN and the GPL standards to the letter to ensure an user friendly
and secure/stable operating system that runs smoothly. Many people in the
Linux community may grumble about this suggestion however life is about
progression and when things do not change and evolve and progress to new
levels then they are doomed to become extinct (think dinosaurs here) or at
the very least remain niche applications. If Fedora project implements such
a model, they do not have to worry about making certain software for the OS
which would take far to much time and man power to create. Prime example
would be the hard disk manager or even the software installer. This sort of
work could be left to groups who's soul purpose is to make such software and
by following strict guidelines they would become Fedora project "partners"
and in turn they would be promised that their software will be included in
the fedora core release. Also by following strict guidelines this software
could be implemented in other Linux distributions which are also following
said guidelines. This would take the pressure off of Fedora and they can
then focus on whats important which is making their OS run like silk. Again
let me stress this approach is keeping in mind that projects such as Fedora
and other Linux distributions desire to penetrate more into the home desktop
market, which then also means more users will or could eventually equate to
greater adoption of the platform in other industries as a result of user
awareness and user comfort with the Linux platform. I should also mention
that those software development groups that do not comply could be offered
as Fedora extras so the community still has choices which is really part of
the appeal of Linux.
Okay so with all that said how could this generate income? Well lets say
Fedora project comes up with one of the first 100% standard enforced
distributions which is as user friendly or even more so than MS windows. Now
say a "ambassador" from Fedora can start making the rounds to Dell and other
companies and attempt to get them to start offering this FREE Linux
distribution on some of their PC models, which would also allow for lower
prices on the retail side for them (ie Dell, Gateway etc.) as the OS is FREE
and that cuts down on cost which the end user ends up incurring. But we
still have not addressed revenue for the Fedora project, and this can be
done by following the Redhat model of offering technical support. Fedora
project could basically offer technical support certification and training
to Dell staff as an example so they (the PC manufacturer) can then take over
supporting the platform for their end users, which also equates to revenue
for these companies in the long run because they can offer extended tech
support to end users at a premium. Fedora core could charge a VERY minimal
fee for this training, so say charge enough that it would generate revenue
that can then be pumped back into the project and at the same time would
still make it cheaper for Dell and other companies to go with Linux on some
desktop offerings as opposed to having a windows only offering.
The future of Linux if to be taken seriously should not be relegated to just
the business, government, and education world as far as standards,
reliability, and software / hardware vendor support is concerned. The brand
will grow far more rapidly if consumers are adopting the standard at home
and at work so basically this is a bottom up approach. This of this, more
desktop users in the home also means more software sales for major companies
because you will have more people buying video games and other such things
which will also mean more companies willing to adopt the platform because
software offering become greater.
There needs to be a consorted effort on the parts of all parties involved to
take Linux to that next phase of existence other wise Linux as a brand,
while it may grow some what will not see its full potential. With the
software being a open and free model we still have to realize with a flurry
of hodge podge coding and no standards insight the end user ends up losing
at least as far as the home front is concerned. Most people are forced to
run duel boot Windows and Linux systems because software makers and hardware
manufactures have not fully bought into the Linux model and we as a
community only have ourselves to blame for that. This approach will also
take some evangelizing to the software makers of such things as yum and KDE
however I believe that those who do not see the need and importants of doing
such things will render themselves obsolete in the long run. Just look at
the Unix model, and we can see what the disasters of not doing this can
incur.
10:03 a.m.
On Fri, 2006-04-21 at 10:42 -0400, Alo Tsum wrote:
<snip>
Most people are forced to run duel boot Windows and Linux systems
because software makers and hardware manufactures have not fully
bought into the Linux model and we as a community only have ourselves
to blame for that.
Yeah I blame myself everyday that ATI and nVidea don't understand they
sell hardware instead of software and that making that software open
source will not change anything to the fact I still have to buy their
hardware.
I think you should not blame the community for things that it should not
be blamed for.
- Erwin
10:14 a.m.
Someone made the excellent point (I think it was during the recent
proprietary media flame war) that thanks to the current state of the
patent system, almost every sizable computer product (hardware or
software) is infringing on patents. Publishing technical
documentation or driver source code only helps competitors identify
"stolen IP". I think it's a good point.
Joe.
On 4/21/06, Erwin Rol <mailinglists(a)erwinrol.com> wrote:
Yeah I blame myself everyday that ATI and nVidea don't understand
they
sell hardware instead of software and that making that software open
source will not change anything to the fact I still have to buy their
hardware.
12:54 p.m.
Alo Tsum wrote:
how generating revenue to put back into the project and make it more
self sufficient. So I have a few suggestions which I think the Redhat
company itself should take note of. Firstly Redhat while promoting Linux
among enthusiast is also in the business of making money. On that front
I believe that they should not only attempt to evangelize Linux in the
Hum let me send out an alternate view: Free Software is outside the Sell
and Evangelize paradigm. It exists, it can be offered, but its meaning
in the world is that it honestly is there for people to use if they have
a use for it. This is something different than commercial OSes that are
there despite you asked to NOT have it, that are shoved down your
throat, sold to you, lock you in and so on.
The Fedora project is the perfect tool for this and here is how. The
fedora team should focus SOLELY on making the operating system run as
smoothly and as fast as possible, interacting with a HUGE number of
hardware configurations. Installation needs to be as smooth as silk and
Wll no argument there since that is useful for everyone.
upgrading needs to be fail proof from version to version. Previously
installed drives with personal user data needs to be able to be retained
without fail from upgrade to upgrade if the user isn't doing a clean
Fedora is very decent at this already.
install. Now I would like to move on to "partnerships"
Fedora project
should look into making "partners" or some other creative term to define
other Linux projects and organizations. In this partnership Fedora will
tightly enforce standards which will ensure that any software created to
run on fedora is following say the OIN and the GPL standards to the
RHAT can confidently claim to have written the book on following "GPL
standards".
by following strict guidelines they would become Fedora project
"partners" and in turn they would be promised that their software will
be included in the fedora core release. Also by following strict
...
approach is keeping in mind that projects such as Fedora and other
Linux
distributions desire to penetrate more into the home desktop market,
Hum again with the 'market', Free software doesn't compete in that
sense, it is offered in the hope that it is useful, you can imagine it
as demand-led.
which then also means more users will or could eventually equate to
greater adoption of the platform in other industries as a result of user
No insult intended, but you or I don't get paid on the basis of
adoption. I'm sure we're both pleased if there is increased adoption
and maybe you or I will spend some time if we think it will increase
takeup. But nonetheless offering a Free OS like Fedora is a different
game than selling Commercial OSes.
Now say a "ambassador" from Fedora can start making the
rounds to Dell
Hum this is the thing, Fedora just is and Dell can take it up if they
like. "Selling" a Free OS seems like a bit of an impedance mismatch.
Why should people already pouring effort into the OS with no direct hope
of return act to improve Dell's worldview as a charitable act if Michael
is too locked into Bill's gravy train to do it himself?
at a premium. Fedora core could charge a VERY minimal fee for this
training, so say charge enough that it would generate revenue that can
...
The future of Linux if to be taken seriously should not be relegated
to
If a Free OS is taken seriously is up to the potential users. I take it
real serious already.
There needs to be a con[ce]rted effort on the parts of all parties
involved to take Linux to that next phase of existence other wise Linux
as a brand, while it may grow some what will not see its full potential.
With the software being a open and free model we still have to realize
No.
-Andy
1:39 p.m.
Those are some truly great suggestions; No one reasoning logically
should have any reason whatsoever to be offended.
It would be nice if the newly-revamped Fedora governing body could
include representation from the non-technical community. I realize this
is probably a "pie-in-the-sky" expectation, and I can't imagine how one
would go about selecting a person (or persons) for this role, but if
this could somehow be accomplished then the distribution itself would be
more universally appealing.
This is not to imply that the current state of the distro is not
excellent. Successfully preparing for release something as complex and
feature-complete as Fedora Core is a daunting task well undertaken to
date.
Here are a few quick suggestions off the top of MY head. I realize some
of these have been mentioned before:
1. Pre-release non-technical user testing.
Integrate this process early in the testing phase. Document the
findings and make them easily accessible to everyone, not just the core
developers. Host local "touch and feel" sessions to attract users who
might want to have a say in the future of the project but don't have the
technical background to contribute code.
2. Marketing.
Get with the Mozilla people if necessary and figure out what they're
doing "right." Just about everyone's heard of Firefox by now.
3. Ego-containment.
Leave the egos at the door.
4. Be more open-minded.
From the parent post:
"Upgrading needs to be fail proof from version to version. Previously
installed drives with personal user data needs to be able to be retained
without fail from upgrade to upgrade if the user isn't doing a clean
install."
Response:
"Fedora is very decent at this already."
This sort of response shows no willingness to re-examine current
practices and is very off-putting to people looking to become involved
in the project.
Before you bother flaming, I realize these are very general statements.
The point is to foster discussion.
DP
On Fri, 2006-04-21 at 18:54 +0100, Andy Green wrote:
Alo Tsum wrote:
> how generating revenue to put back into the project and make it more
> self sufficient. So I have a few suggestions which I think the Redhat
> company itself should take note of. Firstly Redhat while promoting Linux
> among enthusiast is also in the business of making money. On that front
> I believe that they should not only attempt to evangelize Linux in the
Hum let me send out an alternate view: Free Software is outside the Sell
and Evangelize paradigm. It exists, it can be offered, but its meaning
in the world is that it honestly is there for people to use if they have
a use for it. This is something different than commercial OSes that are
there despite you asked to NOT have it, that are shoved down your
throat, sold to you, lock you in and so on.
> The Fedora project is the perfect tool for this and here is how. The
> fedora team should focus SOLELY on making the operating system run as
> smoothly and as fast as possible, interacting with a HUGE number of
> hardware configurations. Installation needs to be as smooth as silk and
Wll no argument there since that is useful for everyone.
> upgrading needs to be fail proof from version to version. Previously
> installed drives with personal user data needs to be able to be retained
> without fail from upgrade to upgrade if the user isn't doing a clean
Fedora is very decent at this already.
> install. Now I would like to move on to "partnerships" Fedora project
> should look into making "partners" or some other creative term to define
> other Linux projects and organizations. In this partnership Fedora will
> tightly enforce standards which will ensure that any software created to
> run on fedora is following say the OIN and the GPL standards to the
RHAT can confidently claim to have written the book on following "GPL
standards".
> by following strict guidelines they would become Fedora project
> "partners" and in turn they would be promised that their software will
> be included in the fedora core release. Also by following strict
...
> approach is keeping in mind that projects such as Fedora and other Linux
> distributions desire to penetrate more into the home desktop market,
Hum again with the 'market', Free software doesn't compete in that
sense, it is offered in the hope that it is useful, you can imagine it
as demand-led.
> which then also means more users will or could eventually equate to
> greater adoption of the platform in other industries as a result of user
No insult intended, but you or I don't get paid on the basis of
adoption. I'm sure we're both pleased if there is increased adoption
and maybe you or I will spend some time if we think it will increase
takeup. But nonetheless offering a Free OS like Fedora is a different
game than selling Commercial OSes.
> Now say a "ambassador" from Fedora can start making the rounds to Dell
Hum this is the thing, Fedora just is and Dell can take it up if they
like. "Selling" a Free OS seems like a bit of an impedance mismatch.
Why should people already pouring effort into the OS with no direct hope
of return act to improve Dell's worldview as a charitable act if Michael
is too locked into Bill's gravy train to do it himself?
> at a premium. Fedora core could charge a VERY minimal fee for this
> training, so say charge enough that it would generate revenue that can
...
> The future of Linux if to be taken seriously should not be relegated to
If a Free OS is taken seriously is up to the potential users. I take it
real serious already.
> There needs to be a con[ce]rted effort on the parts of all parties
> involved to take Linux to that next phase of existence other wise Linux
> as a brand, while it may grow some what will not see its full potential.
> With the software being a open and free model we still have to realize
No.
-Andy
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list(a)redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
--
=======================================
David-Paul Niner, RHCE
dpniner(a)dpniner.name
Florida, United States of America
Public Key for GPG key 1FCE01A2
available from http://www.dpniner.name
GPG Fingerprint for key 1FCE01A2:
9147 2826 BF20 962D C53E 6B1C 97FD 77A6 1FCE 01A2
=======================================
--
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.
2:29 p.m.
David-Paul Niner wrote:
Those are some truly great suggestions; No one reasoning logically
should have any reason whatsoever to be offended.
I am fairly hard to offend - what you read was disagreement.
It would be nice if the newly-revamped Fedora governing body could
include representation from the non-technical community. I realize this
is probably a "pie-in-the-sky" expectation, and I can't imagine how one
would go about selecting a person (or persons) for this role, but if
this could somehow be accomplished then the distribution itself would be
more universally appealing.
Could you explain a little deeper about how inclusion of "representation
from the non-technical community" at the beginning of your paragraph
gets Fedora to be "more universally appealing" by the end?
1. Pre-release non-technical user testing.
The test releases merely need to be given to non-technical users -- by,
eg, you -- for this to happen.
2. Marketing.
Why? I know why a commercial product is marketed, the goal is to
maximize profit. But I'm not sure of the application to Free software.
If you have some philosophical basis for it I am interested to hear
it, but you just assume marketing Free software is a righteous goal.
>From the parent post:
"Upgrading needs to be fail proof from version to version. Previously
installed drives with personal user data needs to be able to be retained
without fail from upgrade to upgrade if the user isn't doing a clean
install."
Response:
"Fedora is very decent at this already."
This sort of response shows no willingness to re-examine current
practices and is very off-putting to people looking to become involved
in the project.
That "sort of response" in fact shows my excellent experience with an
rpm-based upgrade system, eg, upgrading boxes from FC1 through FC4 using
yum. As I said Fedora IS very decent at this already thanks to the
solid basis of RPM. If you believe otherwise please elaborate.
Before you bother flaming, I realize these are very general
statements.
The point is to foster discussion.
If you want to foster discussion, please issue considered argumentation,
not unreasoned bulletpoints.
-Andy
4:34 p.m.
"If you want to foster discussion, please issue considered
argumentation, not unreasoned bulletpoints."
Life Lesson #0: This is just the sort of response that causes people to
assume defensive postures.
Your assumption that your personal experiences in regards to rpm-based
upgrades are reflective of the collective experiences of all users is
incorrect. Overall, the process may be "excellent," but there is
clearly room for some improvement, or someone wouldn't have bothered
posting about it to a mailing list, would they?
In regards to the involvement of non-technical individuals earlier in
the testing process, I believe I was quite clear in my original message
that I did not know exactly how the project should go about implementing
that. Please, calm down and read my message again.
Maybe 100 people will believe that to be a ridiculous idea, but if a
handful of people start talking about it, who knows where it would lead?
Also, you're awarding yourself an unrealistic amount of self-importance
in a group discussion.
;-)
DP
--
=======================================
David-Paul Niner, RHCE
dpniner(a)dpniner.name
Florida, United States of America
Public Key for GPG key 1FCE01A2
available from http://www.dpniner.name
GPG Fingerprint for key 1FCE01A2:
9147 2826 BF20 962D C53E 6B1C 97FD 77A6 1FCE 01A2
=======================================
On Fri, 2006-04-21 at 20:29 +0100, Andy Green wrote:
David-Paul Niner wrote:
> Those are some truly great suggestions; No one reasoning logically
> should have any reason whatsoever to be offended.
I am fairly hard to offend - what you read was disagreement.
> It would be nice if the newly-revamped Fedora governing body could
> include representation from the non-technical community. I realize this
> is probably a "pie-in-the-sky" expectation, and I can't imagine how
one
> would go about selecting a person (or persons) for this role, but if
> this could somehow be accomplished then the distribution itself would be
> more universally appealing.
Could you explain a little deeper about how inclusion of "representation
from the non-technical community" at the beginning of your paragraph
gets Fedora to be "more universally appealing" by the end?
> 1. Pre-release non-technical user testing.
The test releases merely need to be given to non-technical users -- by,
eg, you -- for this to happen.
> 2. Marketing.
Why? I know why a commercial product is marketed, the goal is to
maximize profit. But I'm not sure of the application to Free software.
If you have some philosophical basis for it I am interested to hear
it, but you just assume marketing Free software is a righteous goal.
>>From the parent post:
>
> "Upgrading needs to be fail proof from version to version. Previously
> installed drives with personal user data needs to be able to be retained
> without fail from upgrade to upgrade if the user isn't doing a clean
> install."
>
> Response:
>
> "Fedora is very decent at this already."
>
> This sort of response shows no willingness to re-examine current
> practices and is very off-putting to people looking to become involved
> in the project.
That "sort of response" in fact shows my excellent experience with an
rpm-based upgrade system, eg, upgrading boxes from FC1 through FC4 using
yum. As I said Fedora IS very decent at this already thanks to the
solid basis of RPM. If you believe otherwise please elaborate.
> Before you bother flaming, I realize these are very general statements.
> The point is to foster discussion.
If you want to foster discussion, please issue considered argumentation,
not unreasoned bulletpoints.
-Andy
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list(a)redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
--
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.
5:22 p.m.
David-Paul Niner wrote:
> "If you want to foster discussion, please issue considered
> argumentation, not unreasoned bulletpoints."
Life Lesson #0: This is just the sort of response that causes people to
assume defensive postures.
I don't mind if you feel the need to form a defensive posture on being
told you posted a load of handwaving junk. Have at it.
Your assumption that your personal experiences in regards to
rpm-based
upgrades are reflective of the collective experiences of all users is
incorrect. Overall, the process may be "excellent," but there is
clearly room for some improvement, or someone wouldn't have bothered
posting about it to a mailing list, would they?
I have bad news: many posts on the Internet are made if there is a valid
point to them or not. If, as the original poster, you feel that upgrade
installs are broken, please talk about that. My experience is I have
done yum dist-upgrades, CD upgrades and CD reinstalls and the only way I
blew user data away was if I reformatted the filesystem. If you have
anything to add that doesn't fit with that experience, please talk about it.
In regards to the involvement of non-technical individuals earlier
in
the testing process, I believe I was quite clear in my original message
that I did not know exactly how the project should go about implementing
that. Please, calm down and read my message again.
It seems I correctly apprehended the missing middle in your message the
first time, thanks.
Also, you're awarding yourself an unrealistic amount of
self-importance
in a group discussion.
;-)
Good job you were standing by with a "life lesson".
Have a nice evening.
-Andy
6:23 p.m.
This "life lesson" was meant to be just that -- something for you take
away and digest. I do sincerely apologize if I embarrassed you; it was
a bad call for me to write what I did.
I now realize, however, it seems quite likely that you could benefit
from some talking with someone about things, as you seem quite angry:
"I don't mind if you feel the need to form a defensive posture on being
told you posted a load of handwaving junk."
My original intention was not to put down you or the project, it was
merely to generate some discussion.
It's just not worth it.
Seriously, best of luck; I have nothing against you and wish you well.
=======================================
David-Paul Niner, RHCE
dpniner(a)dpniner.name
Florida, United States of America
Public Key for GPG key 1FCE01A2
available from http://www.dpniner.name
GPG Fingerprint for key 1FCE01A2:
9147 2826 BF20 962D C53E 6B1C 97FD 77A6 1FCE 01A2
=======================================
>> "If you want to foster discussion, please issue
considered
>> argumentation, not unreasoned bulletpoints."
>
> Life Lesson #0: This is just the sort of response that causes people to
> assume defensive postures.
I don't mind if you feel the need to form a defensive posture on being
told you posted a load of handwaving junk. Have at it.
> Your assumption that your personal experiences in regards to rpm-based
> upgrades are reflective of the collective experiences of all users is
> incorrect. Overall, the process may be "excellent," but there is
> clearly room for some improvement, or someone wouldn't have bothered
> posting about it to a mailing list, would they?
I have bad news: many posts on the Internet are made if there is a valid
point to them or not. If, as the original poster, you feel that upgrade
installs are broken, please talk about that. My experience is I have
done yum dist-upgrades, CD upgrades and CD reinstalls and the only way I
blew user data away was if I reformatted the filesystem. If you have
anything to add that doesn't fit with that experience, please talk about it.
> In regards to the involvement of non-technical individuals earlier in
> the testing process, I believe I was quite clear in my original message
> that I did not know exactly how the project should go about implementing
> that. Please, calm down and read my message again.
It seems I correctly apprehended the missing middle in your message the
first time, thanks.
> Also, you're awarding yourself an unrealistic amount of self-importance
> in a group discussion.
>
> ;-)
Good job you were standing by with a "life lesson".
Have a nice evening.
-Andy
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list(a)redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
--
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.
4:26 a.m.
David-Paul Niner wrote:
This "life lesson" was meant to be just that -- something
for you take
away and digest. I do sincerely apologize if I embarrassed you; it was
a bad call for me to write what I did.
I now realize, however, it seems quite likely that you could benefit
from some talking with someone about things, as you seem quite angry:
Hm, I could have benefited from discussing what the meaning of
'marketing' actually is for Free software, especially now I read there
is a fedora-marketing list. How does this fit in with the current
project goals, is it a mild, budgetless advocacy concept or a gung-ho
tattooed-on-the-forehead self flagellating squad of jihadis that raid
corporate offices for re-education of the inhabitants, how that crosses
over with RHEL / Redhat Desktop traditional marketing, what the metric
is for 'success' on Fedora marketing, how it can even be measured given
the inherent redistribution, etc.
>>>> 1. Pre-release non-technical user testing.
>>>> 2. Marketing.
>>>> 3. Ego-containment.
>>>> 4. Be more open-minded.
>>> If you want to foster discussion, please issue
considered
>>> argumentation, not unreasoned bulletpoints
>> Life Lesson #0: This is just the sort of response that causes
people
>> to assume defensive postures.
...
>> Also, you're awarding yourself an unrealistic amount of
>> self-importance in a group discussion.
> I don't mind if you feel the need to form a defensive posture
on being
> told you posted a load of handwaving junk.
My original intention was not to put down you or the project, it was
merely to generate some discussion.
Seriously, best of luck; I have nothing against you and wish you well.
Yeah same to you.
-Andy
6:27 p.m.
On 4/21/06, David-Paul Niner <dpniner(a)dpniner.name> wrote:
Maybe 100 people will believe that to be a ridiculous idea, but if a
handful of people start talking about it, who knows where it would lead?
I know where it will lead... to a 120 post long thread with 12
participants. 6 of which think their ideas are great but don't have
the resources to implement any of them. The other 6 thinks the ideas
are bad and have decided that convincing the other 6 through sheer
superhuman retorical prowess is a constructive way to earn brownie
points with the 5 people in the thread that agree with them. No wait
13 particpants. The 13th participant who hates everyone on general
principle and only gets involved in the discussion because the themes
being badly expressed by the other 12 people are too important to not
have something worthwhile come out of the discussion.
-jef"Generally good ideas are generally very bad discussions. Boring,
mind-numbing detailed specific implementation issues are far more
constructive discussions"spaleta
6:41 p.m.
On Fri, 2006-04-21 at 19:27 -0400, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
On 4/21/06, David-Paul Niner <dpniner(a)dpniner.name> wrote:
> Maybe 100 people will believe that to be a ridiculous idea, but if a
> handful of people start talking about it, who knows where it would lead?
I know where it will lead... to a 120 post long thread with 12
participants. 6 of which think their ideas are great but don't have
the resources to implement any of them. The other 6 thinks the ideas
are bad and have decided that convincing the other 6 through sheer
superhuman retorical prowess is a constructive way to earn brownie
points with the 5 people in the thread that agree with them. No wait
13 particpants. The 13th participant who hates everyone on general
principle and only gets involved in the discussion because the themes
being badly expressed by the other 12 people are too important to not
have something worthwhile come out of the discussion.
-jef"Generally good ideas are generally very bad discussions. Boring,
mind-numbing detailed specific implementation issues are far more
constructive discussions"spaleta
I've learned my own life lesson! ;-)
DP
=======================================
David-Paul Niner, RHCE
dpniner(a)dpniner.name
Florida, United States of America
Public Key for GPG key 1FCE01A2
available from http://www.dpniner.name
GPG Fingerprint for key 1FCE01A2:
9147 2826 BF20 962D C53E 6B1C 97FD 77A6 1FCE 01A2
=======================================
--
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.
8:03 p.m.
On 4/21/06, David-Paul Niner <dpniner(a)dpniner.name> wrote:
On Fri, 2006-04-21 at 19:27 -0400, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
> On 4/21/06, David-Paul Niner <dpniner(a)dpniner.name> wrote:
> > Maybe 100 people will believe that to be a ridiculous idea, but if a
> > handful of people start talking about it, who knows where it would lead?
>
> I know where it will lead... to a 120 post long thread with 12
> participants. 6 of which think their ideas are great but don't have
> the resources to implement any of them. The other 6 thinks the ideas
> are bad and have decided that convincing the other 6 through sheer
> superhuman retorical prowess is a constructive way to earn brownie
> points with the 5 people in the thread that agree with them. No wait
> 13 particpants. The 13th participant who hates everyone on general
> principle and only gets involved in the discussion because the themes
> being badly expressed by the other 12 people are too important to not
> have something worthwhile come out of the discussion.
>
> -jef"Generally good ideas are generally very bad discussions. Boring,
> mind-numbing detailed specific implementation issues are far more
> constructive discussions"spaleta
I've learned my own life lesson! ;-)
I agree. I like specific implementation issues too. I would like to
see some improvements to the already much improved update/add software
system. I would start with 1) highlighting where new software has
been installed in the Gnome menu (or KDE) on my Fedora box 2) being
able to determine which repository a software package to be added is
located 3) be able to add/remove repositories from Pirut and 4) a pipe
dream (whatever that is), of having small deltarpms/smartrpms or
something new to minimize bandwidth.
I have a feeling these issues are already being tackled in some form
except for the project of having a modern update system that creates
the smallest possible update tailored specifically to every user's
machine. That would be an amazing technical achievement.
Benjy
DP
=======================================
David-Paul Niner, RHCE
dpniner(a)dpniner.name
Florida, United States of America
Public Key for GPG key 1FCE01A2
available from http://www.dpniner.name
GPG Fingerprint for key 1FCE01A2:
9147 2826 BF20 962D C53E 6B1C 97FD 77A6 1FCE 01A2
=======================================
--
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list(a)redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
12:24 p.m.
On Fri, 2006-04-21 at 19:27 -0400, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
-jef"Generally good ideas are generally very bad discussions.
Boring,
mind-numbing detailed specific implementation issues are far more
constructive discussions"spaleta
+1
Discussions of grand unified plans for whatever belong on fedora-user or
fedora-marketing or anywhere but here.
11:22 p.m.
Callum Lerwick <seg(a)haxxed.com> wrote:
On Fri, 2006-04-21 at 19:27 -0400, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
> -jef"Generally good ideas are generally very bad discussions. Boring,
> mind-numbing detailed specific implementation issues are far more
> constructive discussions"spaleta
+1
Discussions of grand unified plans for whatever belong on fedora-user or
fedora-marketing or anywhere but here.
They should be carefully filed in /dev/null.
--
Dr. Horst H. von Brand User #22616 counter.li.org
Departamento de Informatica Fono: +56 32 654431
Universidad Tecnica Federico Santa Maria +56 32 654239
Casilla 110-V, Valparaiso, Chile Fax: +56 32 797513
5:15 p.m.
On Fri, 2006-04-21 at 20:29 +0100, Andy Green wrote:
> 1. Pre-release non-technical user testing.
The test releases merely need to be given to non-technical users -- by,
eg, you -- for this to happen.
Or: s/given to/downloaded and run by/
One alternative for non-technical users which Jef Spaleta mentioned a
little while ago in IRC was testing of high-level functionality and
interfaces using VMWare Player and an image provided by Fedora. This
would potentially lower barriers not only to non-technical users but to
willing folks who only have a single system available, or have a low
risk threshold for some other reason.
VMWare has opened its VMDK (virtual disk) format for use by anyone[1] so
there's nothing preventing an intrepid Fedora hacker from designing a
converter program. The community could then make some decisions about
one or more "test platform" images that could be converted to VMDK and
distributed via the existing BitTorrent tracker. People using either
Windows or Linux could then download the free VMWare Player to run the
Fedora VMDK image.
= = = = =
[1] I don't recall the exact license terms, but they are extremely
liberal and would allow, for instance, a GPL-licensed converter program
AIUI.
--
Paul W. Frields, RHCE http://paul.frields.org/
gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717
Fedora Documentation Project: http://fedora.redhat.com/projects/docs/
6:34 p.m.
On 4/21/06, Paul W. Frields <stickster(a)gmail.com> wrote:
One alternative for non-technical users which Jef Spaleta mentioned
a
little while ago in IRC was testing of high-level functionality and
interfaces using VMWare Player and an image provided by Fedora. This
would potentially lower barriers not only to non-technical users but to
willing folks who only have a single system available, or have a low
risk threshold for some other reason.
VMWare has opened its VMDK (virtual disk) format for use by anyone[1] so
there's nothing preventing an intrepid Fedora hacker from designing a
converter program. The community could then make some decisions about
one or more "test platform" images that could be converted to VMDK and
distributed via the existing BitTorrent tracker. People using either
Windows or Linux could then download the free VMWare Player to run the
Fedora VMDK image.
Someone has to check on the licensing is for the VMDK crap. My IRC
musing was a whatif.. based on the assumption that the VMDK crap made
it possible to engineer a player image with a yet-to-be-created open
tool. Its possible right now to have player images, we saw the
community create them in the fc5 testing phase. But i strongly feel
the Fedora project shouldn't be offering official vmware player images
until its possible to create those images with an open tool. I'm
desperately hopeful that the VMDK licensing change is enough to make
such an open tool possible.
But as other pointed out in the same irc discussion special purposed
images that I was thinking of have a very high bandwidth consumption.
There might be another way to do a similar thing with a centralize vnc
or FreeNX terminal server, which we give out "tester" accounts to and
pre-configure some logins and log how people do specific tasks on that
terminal server. Basically a central terminal server Fedora sets up
designed to delibrately watch how people interact with the system.
-jef
7:18 a.m.
On Fri, Apr 21, 2006 at 07:34:32PM -0400, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
On 4/21/06, Paul W. Frields <stickster(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> One alternative for non-technical users which Jef Spaleta mentioned a
> little while ago in IRC was testing of high-level functionality and
> interfaces using VMWare Player and an image provided by Fedora. This
> would potentially lower barriers not only to non-technical users but to
> willing folks who only have a single system available, or have a low
> risk threshold for some other reason.
>
> VMWare has opened its VMDK (virtual disk) format for use by anyone[1] so
> there's nothing preventing an intrepid Fedora hacker from designing a
> converter program. The community could then make some decisions about
> one or more "test platform" images that could be converted to VMDK and
> distributed via the existing BitTorrent tracker. People using either
> Windows or Linux could then download the free VMWare Player to run the
> Fedora VMDK image.
Someone has to check on the licensing is for the VMDK crap. My IRC
musing was a whatif.. based on the assumption that the VMDK crap made
it possible to engineer a player image with a yet-to-be-created open
tool. Its possible right now to have player images, we saw the
community create them in the fc5 testing phase. But i strongly feel
the Fedora project shouldn't be offering official vmware player images
until its possible to create those images with an open tool. I'm
desperately hopeful that the VMDK licensing change is enough to make
such an open tool possible.
qemu can use VMDK images so the tool is already available in extras.
Most likely you'll only need minor (if any) configuration changes
before you can use the image with vmplayer.
Kostas Georgiou
8:30 a.m.
On 4/22/06, Kostas Georgiou <k.georgiou(a)imperial.ac.uk> wrote:
qemu can use VMDK images so the tool is already available in extras.
Most likely you'll only need minor (if any) configuration changes
before you can use the image with vmplayer.
qemu can use them... can qemu create them? We need an open tool that
can be included in FC/FE that can create the content not just use it.
-jef
9:33 a.m.
On Sat, 2006-04-22 at 09:30 -0400, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
On 4/22/06, Kostas Georgiou <k.georgiou(a)imperial.ac.uk> wrote:
> qemu can use VMDK images so the tool is already available in extras.
> Most likely you'll only need minor (if any) configuration changes
> before you can use the image with vmplayer.
qemu can use them... can qemu create them? We need an open tool that
can be included in FC/FE that can create the content not just use it.
The press release on the website claims the licensing terms are
GPL-compatible. There doesn't seem to be anywhere to download the
actual terms, though. I have sent email to VMWare asking for a copy of
the terms for review.
--
Paul W. Frields, RHCE http://paul.frields.org/
gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717
Fedora Documentation Project: http://fedora.redhat.com/projects/docs/
9:46 a.m.
On Sat, Apr 22, 2006 at 09:30:01AM -0400, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
On 4/22/06, Kostas Georgiou <k.georgiou(a)imperial.ac.uk> wrote:
> qemu can use VMDK images so the tool is already available in extras.
> Most likely you'll only need minor (if any) configuration changes
> before you can use the image with vmplayer.
qemu can use them... can qemu create them? We need an open tool that
can be included in FC/FE that can create the content not just use it.
qemu-img create -f vmdk fc5.vmdk 5G
You can install fedora with either qemu (or vmplayer) afterwards.
Have a look at http://www.easyvmx.com/ for examples on how to create
a vmplayer config file so you can boot the image.
You can probably copy an existing disk with something like
qemu-img convert -f raw /dev/hda -O vmdk fc5.vmdk
but I never tried it.
10:09 a.m.
On 4/22/06, Kostas Georgiou <k.georgiou(a)imperial.ac.uk> wrote:
qemu-img create -f vmdk fc5.vmdk 5G
You can install fedora with either qemu (or vmplayer) afterwards.
Have a look at http://www.easyvmx.com/ for examples on how to create
a vmplayer config file so you can boot the image.
You can probably copy an existing disk with something like
qemu-img convert -f raw /dev/hda -O vmdk fc5.vmdk
but I never tried it.
sweeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeet
If we can use qemu to create compatible vmplayer images we can have
'official' images on the fedoraproject website or possibly in the
release trees if the release team see it as worthwhile.
Now its just a question of whether or not having a sequence of
pre-configured images for doing targetted issue testing is worth the
effort... which was my original idea. But I'm not so sure its the best
mechanism to do targetted usability testing. A dedicated vnc/freenx
server which can be re-configured on a per-account basis using
sabayon-like configuration might provide the more flexible option with
much less bandwidth overhead. We can record the whole terminal session
as individuals work through a set of tasks, starting from a
pre-configured desktop environment. Obviously a remote session cant
test certain tasks that I'd like to see some standardized usability
sessions on.. things like burning a cd or dealing with digital cameras
wouldn't be possible to record a session for via a remote vnc or
freenx session without doing something extremely clever.
-jef
11:57 a.m.
On 4/22/06, Jeff Spaleta <jspaleta(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 4/22/06, Kostas Georgiou <k.georgiou(a)imperial.ac.uk> wrote:
> qemu-img create -f vmdk fc5.vmdk 5G
> You can install fedora with either qemu (or vmplayer) afterwards.
> Have a look at http://www.easyvmx.com/ for examples on how to create
> a vmplayer config file so you can boot the image.
>
> You can probably copy an existing disk with something like
> qemu-img convert -f raw /dev/hda -O vmdk fc5.vmdk
> but I never tried it.
sweeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeet
If we can use qemu to create compatible vmplayer images we can have
'official' images on the fedoraproject website or possibly in the
release trees if the release team see it as worthwhile.
Now its just a question of whether or not having a sequence of
pre-configured images for doing targetted issue testing is worth the
effort... which was my original idea. But I'm not so sure its the best
mechanism to do targetted usability testing. A dedicated vnc/freenx
server which can be re-configured on a per-account basis using
sabayon-like configuration might provide the more flexible option with
much less bandwidth overhead. We can record the whole terminal session
as individuals work through a set of tasks, starting from a
pre-configured desktop environment. Obviously a remote session cant
test certain tasks that I'd like to see some standardized usability
sessions on.. things like burning a cd or dealing with digital cameras
wouldn't be possible to record a session for via a remote vnc or
freenx session without doing something extremely clever.
-jef
Can nx/freenx even be a part of Fedora legally?
--
As a boy I jumped through Windows, as a man I play with Penguins.
2:44 p.m.
Arthur Pemberton wrote:
Can nx/freenx even be a part of Fedora legally?
Why not? From nomachine.com/developers.php: "NoMachine develops the NX
technology as Open Source, under the GNU Public License, including
modifications to X-Window libraries, agents and proxies implementing
compression and deployment of X, RDP and VNC desktops, and tunneling of
CIFS/SMB and multimedia channels." FreeNX is under GPL as well.
I *love* NX/FreeNX. It makes it trivial to use my FC desktop over
stupid-slow coffeeshop wireless. At the same time, there are a few
things that would make the NX/FC integration nicer.
- Selinux needs to let NX do its thing (under FC5).
- GNOME and NX need to play nice together, a la vino.
- NX is unhappy on 86_64, which keeps it from Extras.
I dig Jef's idea for an NX server for remote QA testing. Smart. Have the
community pitch in writing test cases, have others pitch in doing the
testing, and the entire thing gets logged and recorded and analyzed
in-house.
6:37 p.m.
On 4/22/06, Jack Tanner <ihok(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
Arthur Pemberton wrote:
> Can nx/freenx even be a part of Fedora legally?
Why not? From nomachine.com/developers.php: "NoMachine develops the NX
technology as Open Source, under the GNU Public License, including
modifications to X-Window libraries, agents and proxies implementing
compression and deployment of X, RDP and VNC desktops, and tunneling of
CIFS/SMB and multimedia channels." FreeNX is under GPL as well.
Okay, I asked since the packages seemed not to be in extras.
--
As a boy I jumped through Windows, as a man I play with Penguins.
4:33 p.m.
Jack Tanner wrote:
- Selinux needs to let NX do its thing (under FC5).
Already reported upstream. For the moment, you can run :
semanage fcontext -a -t textrel_shlib_t /usr/NX/lib/libXcomp.so.1
semanage fcontext -a -t textrel_shlib_t /usr/NX/lib/libjpeg.so.62
chcon -t textrel_shlib_t /usr/NX/lib/libXcomp.so.1
chcon -t textrel_shlib_t /usr/NX/lib/libjpeg.so.62
(as root of course)
Aurélien
--
http://aurelien.bompard.org ~~~~ Jabber : abompard(a)jabber.fr
Growth for the sake of growth is the ideology of the cancer cell.
6:02 p.m.
On 4/21/06, Alo Tsum <alotsum(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Fedora Core 5 is a truly amazing OS and one I think has the potential to
really do great things.
Tell that to the guys at /.
[ snip ]
First suggestions has to do with the software side of things. We users need
a competent software installer which is graphical based.
The problem here is that there are several options, and Fedora has
chosen to stick with Pirut. I am personally not a fan of the GUI style
used by Pirut, but it is quite possible that I am in the minority in
this regard.
One that functions
much the same way that the windows installer works.
This installer should track dependencies naturally and place icons on the desktop or give
the
option to have icons for the software just installed to be placed on the
desktop of the user as well as in the applications menu. Also when watching
This is somewhat impossible, the software is installed very much
different than on Windows. The last thing i think we in general want
is for packagers to take it upon themselves to get packages to put
icons on the desktop. In all fairness though there there are
multiplatform GUI based software installers available: InstallShield
has one, this company also has one: http://www.installjammer.com/
the Boston Linux conference the suggestion was made to offer a hard
disc
manager much like windows offers for formating and receiving hard drivers
etc after installation.
I agree here, however, it would have to be much better, Windows
(natively) only supports a few file systems.
My second set of suggestions will deal with the over all focus and structure
of the fedora project. I was listening to a pod cast interview with the head
of the fedora project where in, the topic came up of some how generating
revenue to put back into the project and make it more self sufficient. So I
have a few suggestions which I think the Redhat company itself should take
note of. Firstly Redhat while promoting Linux among enthusiast is also in
the business of making money. On that front I believe that they should not
only attempt to evangelize Linux in the government, education, and corporate
sectors; they should also attempt to get Linux in each and every home.
I wish Redhat would approach my home government and make them an offer
they can't refuse. But people hate change.
The
reason being is if people are starting to use Linux in their homes and they
are comfortable with it, employers will be more likely and willing to deploy
a operating system which is different in many ways to windows on the
interactive level. Reason being is when people have to stop to learn new
technology this cuts down on productivity and as a person who works for a IT
department in a major university I can also vouch for the fact a IT team
will not be willing to suggest an infrastructure restructuring when they
know, supporting users on something foreign to them is going to increase
their workload 10 fold.
I do not totally agree here. A properly setup Linux distro used for
simple end user tasks should be easier to admin that a similair
Windows system.
So bottom line, more users both advanced,
intermediate and beginners need to be converted to the Linux faithful but
now the question becomes how?
I disagree with you fully here. I hate Windows (except for playing Age
of Empires) and I love Linux (esp. KDE and associated apps) but I do
_not_ think anyone people in general _need_ to be converted to Linux,
that seems very much a pipe dream. To each their own, I used to spend
hours fixign peoples Window's machines, I have simply decided to never
do that again unless I get paid. So everyone should use what they feel
does the job for them. I used Windows since 3.1, and I can't imagine
going back from Fedora/KDE fulltime right now.
The Fedora project is the perfect tool for this and here is how. The
fedora
team should focus SOLELY on making the operating system run as smoothly and
as fast as possible, interacting with a HUGE number of hardware
configurations.
See now, here you have a problem. This is not the M.O of the Fedora
Project. Fedora was not intended to be a "pretty" desktop/home user
operating system.
Installation needs to be as smooth as silk and upgrading
needs to be fail proof from version to version.
That is a very tall order IMHO.
Previously installed drives
with personal user data needs to be able to be retained without fail from
upgrade to upgrade if the user isn't doing a clean install.
Another tall order, but I think this is very important myself however.
[ snip ]
--
As a boy I jumped through Windows, as a man I play with Penguins.
7:39 a.m.
On Fri, 2006-04-21 at 18:02 -0500, Arthur Pemberton wrote:
On 4/21/06, Alo Tsum <alotsum(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> First suggestions has to do with the software side of things. We users need
> a competent software installer which is graphical based.
The problem here is that there are several options, and Fedora has
chosen to stick with Pirut. I am personally not a fan of the GUI style
used by Pirut, but it is quite possible that I am in the minority in
this regard.
Perhaps a minority, but definately not alone. It's hard to believe that
it comes from the same vendor that proposed the HIG.
6:15 a.m.
On Sat, 2006-04-22 at 14:39 +0200, Mark Rosenstand wrote:
On Fri, 2006-04-21 at 18:02 -0500, Arthur Pemberton wrote:
> On 4/21/06, Alo Tsum <alotsum(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > First suggestions has to do with the software side of things. We users need
> > a competent software installer which is graphical based.
>
> The problem here is that there are several options, and Fedora has
> chosen to stick with Pirut. I am personally not a fan of the GUI style
> used by Pirut, but it is quite possible that I am in the minority in
> this regard.
Perhaps a minority, but definately not alone. It's hard to believe that
it comes from the same vendor that proposed the HIG.
Pirut is good for getting the OS installed fast and then installing
groups of software.
Individual packages is better done with yum.
pirut might benefit from some interface changes, but imho it also needs
to be able to install updates to existing software at the same time it
installs new software - so that after installing Fedora, you can just
use pirut to pick your packages - and at the same yum transaction it
will install available updates.
12:33 p.m.
On Tuesday 25 April 2006 05:15am, Michael A. Peters wrote:
On Sat, 2006-04-22 at 14:39 +0200, Mark Rosenstand wrote:
> On Fri, 2006-04-21 at 18:02 -0500, Arthur Pemberton wrote:
> > On 4/21/06, Alo Tsum <alotsum(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> > > First suggestions has to do with the software side of things. We
> > > users need a competent software installer which is graphical based.
> >
> > The problem here is that there are several options, and Fedora has
> > chosen to stick with Pirut. I am personally not a fan of the GUI style
> > used by Pirut, but it is quite possible that I am in the minority in
> > this regard.
>
> Perhaps a minority, but definately not alone. It's hard to believe that
> it comes from the same vendor that proposed the HIG.
Pirut is good for getting the OS installed fast and then installing
groups of software.
Individual packages is better done with yum.
pirut might benefit from some interface changes, but imho it also needs
to be able to install updates to existing software at the same time it
installs new software - so that after installing Fedora, you can just
use pirut to pick your packages - and at the same yum transaction it
will install available updates.
Here, here!
--
Lamont R. Peterson <lamont(a)gurulabs.com>
Senior Instructor
Guru Labs, L.C. [ http://www.GuruLabs.com/ ]
GPG Key fingerprint: F98C E31A 5C4C 834A BCAB 8CB3 F980 6C97 DC0D D409
1:38 p.m.
Hi
On Fri, 2006-04-21 at 18:02 -0500, Arthur Pemberton wrote:
> The Fedora project is the perfect tool for this and here is how.
The fedora
> team should focus SOLELY on making the operating system run as smoothly and
> as fast as possible, interacting with a HUGE number of hardware
> configurations.
See now, here you have a problem. This is not the M.O of the Fedora
Project. Fedora was not intended to be a "pretty" desktop/home user
operating system.
Fairly popular myth. Fedora has a stated goal of being a general purpose
platform.
Rahul
8:28 p.m.
On Sun, 2006-04-23 at 00:08 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
On Fri, 2006-04-21 at 18:02 -0500, Arthur Pemberton wrote:
> See now, here you have a problem. This is not the M.O of the Fedora
> Project. Fedora was not intended to be a "pretty" desktop/home user
> operating system.
Fairly popular myth. Fedora has a stated goal of being a general purpose
platform.
Perhaps, but the #1 reason I use Fedora is because it is the most solid,
reliable, well thought out distribution for desktop use there is IMHO,
and has been since RH 7.0. Lets not forget this.
In fact, my server runs debian. ;P
3:03 a.m.
On Fri, 2006-04-21 at 10:42 -0400, Alo Tsum wrote:
Fedora Core 5 is a truly amazing OS and one I think has the
potential
to really do great things. Looking forward to what the Fedora Project
has the potential to do, especially with its new focus I decided to
give some suggestions as to what could possibly be done starting with
Fedora 6 and onward. Some of my suggestions are definitely based on
the OS itself but others are also concerning the general focus and
outlook of the Fedora Project itself. I hope my suggestion are not
regarded as offensive in anyway and they are only meant to highlight
the greatness of Fedora as well as to reflect my strong desire to see
this project take off and propel the Linux OS to new heights.
First suggestions has to do with the software side of things. We users
need a competent software installer which is graphical based. One that
functions much the same way that the windows installer works.
Oh, no we don't!
Each Application in the Windows world uses it's own installer; The OS
itself has no control over what each installer does and how it registers
itself... or even worse, if it's even capable of uninstalling itself.
This installer should track dependencies naturally and place icons
on
the desktop or give the option to have icons for the software just
installed to be placed on the desktop of the user as well as in the
applications menu.
A. Most Windows installers -do- no track dependencies. At best, they
just blindly copy required DLL into the application directory. (Or
worse, into System32 and/or common, causing the lovely "DLL Hell"
phenomenon)
B. Most/all Windows installers are in-capable of downloading
dependencies.
C. Most Windows installers do no ask you if you want desktop icons (I
don't!)... nor do they ask you where you want to installer the icons, or
even the application itself.
No, we really, -really-, -really- don't want to mimic Microsoft's crappy
install system.
Also when watching the Boston Linux conference the suggestion was
made
to offer a hard disc manager much like windows offers for formating
and receiving hard drivers etc after installation.
?
Anaconda already has such tool.
Same goes for lvm. (system-config-lvm)
My second set of suggestions will deal with the over all focus and
structure of the fedora project. I was listening to a pod cast
interview with the head of the fedora project where in, the topic came
up of some how generating revenue to put back into the project and
make it more self sufficient. So I have a few suggestions which I
think the Redhat company itself should take note of. Firstly Redhat
while promoting Linux among enthusiast is also in the business of
making money. On that front I believe that they should not only
attempt to evangelize Linux in the government, education, and
corporate sectors; they should also attempt to get Linux in each and
every home. The reason being is if people are starting to use Linux in
their homes and they are comfortable with it, employers will be more
likely and willing to deploy a operating system which is different in
many ways to windows on the interactive level. Reason being is when
people have to stop to learn new technology this cuts down on
productivity and as a person who works for a IT department in a major
university I can also vouch for the fact a IT team will not be willing
to suggest an infrastructure restructuring when they know, supporting
users on something foreign to them is going to increase their workload
10 fold. So bottom line, more users both advanced, intermediate and
beginners need to be converted to the Linux faithful but now the
question becomes how?
I doubt that Linux will be joe-six-pack ready any time soon.
Come to think about it, I doubt that Windows is joe-six-pack ready.
Having said that, pushing Fedora into the hands of home users, is a
-great- way to push Linux into enterprises. (and vice versa)
The Fedora project is the perfect tool for this and here is how. The
fedora team should focus SOLELY on making the operating system run as
smoothly and as fast as possible, interacting with a HUGE number of
hardware configurations. Installation needs to be as smooth as silk
and upgrading needs to be fail proof from version to version.
Previously installed drives
As long as open source drivers are being used, upgrade can/should
preserve them.
Once close source drivers are used, it's PITA.
BTW, same goes for Windows; MS can hardly use Windows ME drivers if you
upgrade to XP....
with personal user data needs to be able to be retained without fail
from upgrade to upgrade if the user isn't doing a clean install.
ACK.
Now I would like to move on to "partnerships" Fedora
project should
look into making "partners" or some other creative term to define
other Linux projects and organizations. In this partnership Fedora
will tightly enforce standards which will ensure that any software
created to run on fedora is following say the OIN and the GPL
standards to the letter to ensure an user friendly and secure/stable
operating system that runs smoothly. Many people in the Linux
community may grumble about this suggestion however life is about
progression and when things do not change and evolve and progress to
new levels then they are doomed to become extinct (think dinosaurs
here) or at the very least remain niche applications.
Enforcing people into doing things never works... especially when it
comes to FOSS.
FOSS is built around being a thriving ecosystem with multiple competing
projects... In my view KDE vs. GNOME, OpenOffice vs. koffice, Opera vs.
Konq vs Firefox, etc is a -good- thing. Trying to enforce it will only
create yet-another Microsoft... I doubt that we want to create such a
monster.
I do agree on full GPL/OIN, though.
If Fedora project implements such a model, they do not have to
worry
about making certain software for the OS which would take far to much
time and man power to create. Prime example would be the hard disk
manager or even the software installer.
Ummm...
This sort of work could be left to groups who's soul purpose is
to
make such software and by following strict guidelines they would
become Fedora project "partners" and in turn they would be promised
that their software will be included in the fedora core release. Also
by following strict guidelines this software could be implemented in
other Linux distributions which are also following said guidelines.
This would take the pressure off of Fedora and they can then focus on
whats important which is making their OS run like silk. Again let me
stress this approach is keeping in mind that projects such as Fedora
and other Linux distributions desire to penetrate more into the home
desktop market, which then also means more users will or could
eventually equate to greater adoption of the platform in other
industries as a result of user awareness and user comfort with the
Linux platform. I should also mention that those software development
groups that do not comply could be offered as Fedora extras so the
community still has choices which is really part of the appeal of
Linux.
I semi agree with you here... do again, I rather have 6 projects trying
to achieve goal X, each taking a different route (with the best project
wins) then a single, enforced way of doing things.
I doubt that FOSS would have been if only GNOME would have existed. (and
vice versa)
Okay so with all that said how could this generate income? Well lets
say Fedora project comes up with one of the first 100% standard
enforced distributions which is as user friendly or even more so than
MS windows. Now say a "ambassador" from Fedora can start making the
rounds to Dell and other companies and attempt to get them to start
offering this FREE Linux distribution on some of their PC models,
which would also allow for lower prices on the retail side for them
(ie Dell, Gateway etc.) as the OS is FREE and that cuts down on cost
which the end user ends up incurring. But we still have not addressed
revenue for the Fedora project, and this can be done by following the
Redhat model of offering technical support. Fedora project could
basically offer technical support certification and training to Dell
staff as an example so they (the PC manufacturer) can then take over
supporting the platform for their end users, which also equates to
revenue for these companies in the long run because they can offer
extended tech support to end users at a premium. Fedora core could
charge a VERY minimal fee for this training, so say charge enough that
it would generate revenue that can then be pumped back into the
project and at the same time would still make it cheaper for Dell and
other companies to go with Linux on some desktop offerings as opposed
to having a windows only offering.
Umm.... You are suggesting RedHat drops RHEL and uses Fedora instead,
returning to the old "RedHat Linux" model.
I can't see what RedHat has to gain by dropping RHEL.
The future of Linux if to be taken seriously should not be relegated
to just the business, government, and education world as far as
standards, reliability, and software / hardware vendor support is
concerned. The brand will grow far more rapidly if consumers are
adopting the standard at home and at work so basically this is a
bottom up approach. This of this, more desktop users in the home also
means more software sales for major companies because you will have
more people buying video games and other such things which will also
mean more companies willing to adopt the platform because software
offering become greater.
ACK.
There needs to be a consorted effort on the parts of all parties
involved to take Linux to that next phase of existence other wise
Linux as a brand, while it may grow some what will not see its full
potential. With the software being a open and free model we still have
to realize with a flurry of hodge podge coding and no standards
insight the end user ends up losing at least as far as the home front
is concerned. Most people are forced to run duel boot Windows and
Linux systems because software makers and hardware manufactures have
not fully bought into the Linux model and we as a community only have
ourselves to blame for that.
Not that again... Sigh....
The FOSS community cannot force hardware manufacturers to release open
source drivers.
The FOSS community cannot even make sure that they build compatible
closed source drivers.
More-ever, as an ex Microsoft Beta tester, I can vividly remember the
first release versions of Windows NT (3.1, 3.5, 3.5.1, 4) and 2000 which
were just as troublesome (driver support wise) as Linux is today.
If you wanted to run Windows NT 3.1, you needed NT 3.1 support hardware.
Same goes for Windows 2K (when it was released...)
And the same goes for Linux.
This approach will also take some evangelizing to the software
makers
of such things as yum and KDE however I believe that those who do not
see the need and importants of doing such things will render
themselves obsolete in the long run. Just look at the Unix model, and
we can see what the disasters of not doing this can incur.
Doing what?
Dropping GPL?
Freezing the kernel API by moving into stagnant development mode just so
nVidia/ATI won't be required to keep up?
What are you suggesting?
Gilboa
12:50 p.m.
Le dimanche 23 avril 2006 à 11:03 +0300, Gilboa Davara a écrit :
> Also when watching the Boston Linux conference the suggestion
was made
> to offer a hard disc manager much like windows offers for formating
> and receiving hard drivers etc after installation.
?
Anaconda already has such tool.
Same goes for lvm. (system-config-lvm)
They're not in the same class :
- the anaconda tool is only available at install time
- the lvm tool is rather weak
Compared to the windows tools, they're worse than the printing subsystem
and everyone has been complaining about this one lately
Regards,
--
Nicolas Mailhot
3:14 p.m.
On Sun, 2006-04-23 at 19:50 +0200, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
They're not in the same class :
- the anaconda tool is only available at install time
Adapting Disk Druid to function outside of install would be quite nice.
- the lvm tool is rather weak
And why replicate the functionality Disk Druid already has...
2:52 p.m.
Alo Tsum <alotsum <at> gmail.com> writes:
First
suggestions has to do with the software side of things. We users need
a competent software installer which is graphical based.
Pirut is just that, as are the alternatives available from Extras (Yumex, KYum,
Smart, and probably soon Synaptic with the new apt with repomd and multilib
support).
One that
functions much the same way that the windows installer works.
I think the previous posters have explained pretty well why that's not a good
idea.
This
installer should track dependencies naturally
Pirut does that.
and place icons on the
desktop or give the option to have icons for the software just
installed to be placed on the desktop of the user as well as in the
applications menu.
Pirut doesn't do that, but due to how RPMs and .desktop files are packaged,
this would probably be best implemented within menu editors such as Alacarte
(so you would select menu entry, pick "Copy to desktop", and it would be copied
there) or within the menu itself (as already implemented in KDE, you can
right-click on any menu entry in KDE's Kicker and copy it to the KDE desktop
from the context menu!).
Also when watching the Boston Linux conference the
suggestion was made to offer a hard disc manager much like windows
offers for formating and receiving hard drivers etc after
installation.
Well, depending on what you're trying to do, either QtParted/GParted (both
available in Extras) or system-config-lvm may do the job. What seems to be
missing though is an easy way to add partitions to the fstab. (This has been
brought up recently, and indeed there doesn't seem to be one. And no, I'm not
talking about automounting removable drives, but mounting fixed drives to a
fixed place in the file system, which can be at any point in the FHS, not just
under /media, so editing /etc/fstab really is needed for that use case.)
Kevin Kofler
4:16 p.m.
[ snip ]
Well, depending on what you're trying to do, either
QtParted/GParted (both
available in Extras) or system-config-lvm may do the job. What seems to be
missing though is an easy way to add partitions to the fstab. (This has been
brought up recently, and indeed there doesn't seem to be one. And no, I'm not
talking about automounting removable drives, but mounting fixed drives to a
fixed place in the file system, which can be at any point in the FHS, not just
under /media, so editing /etc/fstab really is needed for that use case.)
Kevin Kofler
Yes, in all fairness, FC should at least auto dete and mount vfat
partions, for that matter, it should offer to mount any fixed partion
whose FS it can detect.
And with no offense to the creater of Pirut, I find console+yum
several times easier to use than Pirut - interface wise.
Arthur
--
As a boy I jumped through Windows, as a man I play with Penguins.
4:41 p.m.
On 4/24/06, Arthur Pemberton <pemboa(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Yes, in all fairness, FC should at least auto dete and mount vfat
partions, for that matter, it should offer to mount any fixed partion
whose FS it can detect.
The policy to ignore fixed partitions by default was the result of
security arguments associated with multiuser server systems.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177177#c19
If you incorrectly define the fedora core mandate as being primarily a
single-user desktop system, then its very easy to say that vfat fixed
disks should be treated like the plugged media devices. But once you
start thinking beyond that very narrow usage case, into other
situations which are more common in data center, or moderatelly sized
multi-user environments, the scenario becomes problematic and its not
so simple an issue as you would originally think.
But don't confuse the lack of an optimal solution right now as
evidence that people don't care about this and that they are not
working to fix it. The PolicyKit work that is going on upstream with
regard to hal is evidence of real effort to make progress on a thorny
issue which has to strike a balance between single-user scenarios and
server scenarios for Fedora Core's "general use" mandate.
-jef"you got your desktop software on my server
you got your server software on my desktop
mmmmmmmmmmmmm
to horribly incompatible usage scenarios which taste great together!
"spaleta
4:52 p.m.
On 4/24/06, Jeff Spaleta <jspaleta(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 4/24/06, Arthur Pemberton <pemboa(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> Yes, in all fairness, FC should at least auto dete and mount vfat
> partions, for that matter, it should offer to mount any fixed partion
> whose FS it can detect.
The policy to ignore fixed partitions by default was the result of
security arguments associated with multiuser server systems.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177177#c19
If you incorrectly define the fedora core mandate as being primarily a
single-user desktop system, then its very easy to say that vfat fixed
disks should be treated like the plugged media devices. But once you
start thinking beyond that very narrow usage case, into other
situations which are more common in data center, or moderatelly sized
multi-user environments, the scenario becomes problematic and its not
so simple an issue as you would originally think.
But don't confuse the lack of an optimal solution right now as
evidence that people don't care about this and that they are not
working to fix it. The PolicyKit work that is going on upstream with
regard to hal is evidence of real effort to make progress on a thorny
issue which has to strike a balance between single-user scenarios and
server scenarios for Fedora Core's "general use" mandate.
Ok, fair enough. Thanks for that information. But wouldn't something
on the firstboot or Anaconda side solve that problem? Or am I
misunderstanding the problem?
--
As a boy I jumped through Windows, as a man I play with Penguins.
5 p.m.
On 4/24/06, Arthur Pemberton <pemboa(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Ok, fair enough. Thanks for that information. But wouldn't
something
on the firstboot or Anaconda side solve that problem? Or am I
misunderstanding the problem?
You are most likely underestimating the complexity of the problem. As
I said readup on the role PolicyKit is going to play in how hal
operates to learn how this is going to work in the not so distant
future of 20 minutes from now.
-jef"I miss Max Headroom"spaleta
5:15 p.m.
On 4/24/06, Jeff Spaleta <jspaleta(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 4/24/06, Arthur Pemberton <pemboa(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> Ok, fair enough. Thanks for that information. But wouldn't something
> on the firstboot or Anaconda side solve that problem? Or am I
> misunderstanding the problem?
You are most likely underestimating the complexity of the problem. As
I said readup on the role PolicyKit is going to play in how hal
operates to learn how this is going to work in the not so distant
future of 20 minutes from now.
-jef"I miss Max Headroom"spaleta
Will do - Peace
--
As a boy I jumped through Windows, as a man I play with Penguins.
8:23 a.m.
Yes, in all fairness, FC should at least auto dete and mount vfat
partions, for that matter, it should offer to mount any fixed partion
whose FS it can detect.
Maybe that's just me, but even on my single-user system, I want my VFAT
partitions mounted at predictable, easy-to-remember locations (/c for C:, /d
for D:, /e for E: and /f for F:), not some arbitrary /media/diskn locations
which aren't even consistent from boot to boot. (As for ext2/ext3 partitions,
if I had any other than /, they'd of course have to go to the right place in
the FHS, not /media/diskn.)
Kevin Kofler
8:56 a.m.
Dnia 25-04-2006, wto o godzinie 13:23 +0000, Kevin Kofler napisał(a):
Maybe that's just me, but even on my single-user system, I want
my VFAT
partitions mounted at predictable, easy-to-remember locations (/c for C:, /d
for D:, /e for E: and /f for F:)
1. You can add any partition to fstab in almost
any location you want
(you can't use /dev/null for example, but other than existing files,
you're really free to do what you want). Anaconda has a GUI for it and
it worked every time I tried.
2. It's hard or impossible to know which partition is Windows D: and
which is E:, because:
a) newer Windows versions allow you to change the drives letters on the
fly, you'd have to mount the boot partition (and know which one is
that), read some files from it (when the settings are stored),
understand their format and then remount partitions in appropriate
locations, that's hard I guess, and
b) if you have two Windows versions (i.e. 98 and XP), they can see the
drives with different letters, so which one is more important?
some arbitrary /media/diskn locations
which aren't even consistent from boot to boot.
This is a real problem, but I
remember discussions regarding it, so it
will get better and better with time.
Lam
9:04 a.m.
On Tue, 2006-04-25 at 15:56 +0200, Leszek Matok wrote:
Dnia 25-04-2006, wto o godzinie 13:23 +0000, Kevin Kofler
napisał(a):
> Maybe that's just me, but even on my single-user system, I want my VFAT
> partitions mounted at predictable, easy-to-remember locations (/c for C:, /d
> for D:, /e for E: and /f for F:)
1. You can add any partition to fstab in almost any location you want
(you can't use /dev/null for example, but other than existing files,
you're really free to do what you want). Anaconda has a GUI for it and
it worked every time I tried.
2. It's hard or impossible to know which partition is Windows D: and
which is E:, because:
a) newer Windows versions allow you to change the drives letters on the
fly, you'd have to mount the boot partition (and know which one is
that), read some files from it (when the settings are stored),
understand their format and then remount partitions in appropriate
locations, that's hard I guess, and
b) if you have two Windows versions (i.e. 98 and XP), they can see the
drives with different letters, so which one is more important?
> some arbitrary /media/diskn locations
> which aren't even consistent from boot to boot.
This is a real problem, but I remember discussions regarding it, so it
will get better and better with time.
Lam
--
Actually is much -much- worse.
Windows 2K and above, keep a UUID to drive letter map in their registry.
It's entirely possible to have two Windows OS on the same disk (hda1,
hda2), each displaying a third partition (hda3) with a different drive
latter.
So, even if you mount each Windows drive, open it's registry and read
the HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\MountedDevices\DosDevices[CDE...] keys,
you might have conflicting drive letters.
Gilboa
9:08 a.m.
Leszek
b) if you have two Windows versions (i.e. 98 and XP), they can see
the
drives with different letters, so which one is more important?
I suppose it doesn't matter so much what other OSs do, as being able to
configure these partitions to reliably mount in a specific location.
I have seen something strange. On a notebook with SATA disk (/dev/sda),
I have a PCMCIA Compact Flash adapter. When I plug in a CF, I find a new
drive /dev/hda, but it never mounts automatically. The same CF plugged
into a USB CF reader *will* mount automatically. On a different machine
the main disk is /dev/hda and the CF over USB is /dev/sda. I'm concerned
that this is an accident waiting to happen. If the GUI doesn't start
auto-mounting these with an intuitive name then I'll continue to be at
risk of umounting or mkfs the wrong device...
-Cam
--
camilo(a)mesias.co.uk <--
2:54 p.m.
Leszek Matok <Lam <at> Lam.pl> writes:
> Maybe that's just me, but even on my single-user system, I
want my VFAT
> partitions mounted at predictable, easy-to-remember locations (/c for
C:, /d
> for D:, /e for E: and /f for F:)
1. You can add any partition to fstab in almost any location you want
(you can't use /dev/null for example, but other than existing files,
you're really free to do what you want). Anaconda has a GUI for it and
it worked every time I tried.
I know. This is exactly why I think fstab is a better solution for fixed disks
than automounting. What is missing is a GUI tool to edit fstab after
installation. I don't need it, but less experienced people would have a use for
it.
2. It's hard or impossible to know which partition is Windows D:
and
which is E:, because:
a) newer Windows versions allow you to change the drives letters on the
fly, you'd have to mount the boot partition (and know which one is
that), read some files from it (when the settings are stored),
understand their format and then remount partitions in appropriate
locations, that's hard I guess, and
b) if you have two Windows versions (i.e. 98 and XP), they can see the
drives with different letters, so which one is more important?
Which is why I believe letting the user set things up to his/her liking is
better than try to automatically guess a location. By definition, fixed disks
rarely change, why'd you want to figure out the mount point from scratch again
at each boot? (This causes both unnecessary work during bootup and the infamous
unpredictable mount points.)
I don't mean to offend the people working on automatic mounting, their efforts
are very appreciated (having to mount floppies, CDs, USB sticks or whatever by
hand after plugging it in is so yesterday), but I think trying to use the same
scheme for fixed disks is oversimplifying things. "If all you have is a hammer,
every problem starts looking a lot like a nail." Trying to hammer in a screw is
a bad idea. ;-)
Kevin Kofler
9:13 a.m.
On 4/25/06, Kevin Kofler <kevin.kofler(a)chello.at> wrote:
Maybe that's just me, but even on my single-user system, I want
my VFAT
partitions mounted at predictable, easy-to-remember locations (/c for C:, /d
for D:, /e for E: and /f for F:), not some arbitrary /media/diskn locations
which aren't even consistent from boot to boot. (As for ext2/ext3 partitions,
if I had any other than /, they'd of course have to go to the right place in
the FHS, not /media/diskn.)
P-O-L-I-C-Y-K-I-T
-jef"
Butterfly in the sky, I can go twice as high
Take a look, it's in a book - Reading Rainbow.
I can go anywhere!
Friends to know and ways to grow - Reading Rainbow.
I can be anything!
Take a look, it's in a book - Reading Rainbow.
Reading Rainbow, Reading Rainbow, Reading Rainbow, Reading Rainbow!
"spaleta
11:08 a.m.
On 4/25/06, Kevin Kofler <kevin.kofler(a)chello.at> wrote:
> Yes, in all fairness, FC should at least auto dete and mount
vfat
> partions, for that matter, it should offer to mount any fixed partion
> whose FS it can detect.
Maybe that's just me, but even on my single-user system, I want my VFAT
partitions mounted at predictable, easy-to-remember locations (/c for C:, /d
for D:, /e for E: and /f for F:), not some arbitrary /media/diskn locations
which aren't even consistent from boot to boot. (As for ext2/ext3 partitions,
if I had any other than /, they'd of course have to go to the right place in
the FHS, not /media/diskn.)
Kevin Kofler
No, it is not just you, this is how I had thing ssetup before. And it
is a good, and easy to understand way of mounting Window's based
partions.
--
As a boy I jumped through Windows, as a man I play with Penguins.
8:10 p.m.
On Mon, 2006-04-24 at 19:52 +0000, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Pirut doesn't do that, but due to how RPMs and .desktop files are
packaged,
this would probably be best implemented within menu editors such as Alacarte
(so you would select menu entry, pick "Copy to desktop", and it would be copied
there) or within the menu itself (as already implemented in KDE, you can
right-click on any menu entry in KDE's Kicker and copy it to the KDE desktop
from the context menu!).
Gnome does this too. No need for menu editors.
6:08 a.m.
On Fri, 2006-04-21 at 10:42 -0400, Alo Tsum wrote:
First suggestions has to do with the software side of things. We users
need a competent software installer which is graphical based. One that
functions much the same way that the windows installer works. This
installer should track dependencies naturally and place icons on the
desktop or give the option to have icons for the software just
installed to be placed on the desktop of the user as well as in the
applications menu.
I would like to see "Install Software" (what you get by right clicking
on an rpm file) patched to use yum localinstall rather than just rpm
directly - but other than that, right clicking on an application does
what should be done.
A properly packaged rpm will make the necessary menu entries.
Also when watching the Boston Linux conference the suggestion was
made to offer a hard disc manager much like windows offers for
formating and receiving hard drivers etc after installation.
You can do that with System -> Administration -> Logical Volume
Management. If you don't intent to use a hard drive as part of an LVM,
then gparted (from Fedora Extras) is just a yum away.
Firstly Redhat while promoting Linux among enthusiast is also in the
business of making money. On that front I believe that they should not
only attempt to evangelize Linux in the government, education, and
corporate sectors; they should also attempt to get Linux in each and
every home.
Time and a place for each marketing endeavor.
Think too big and you run out of money and accomplish nothing.
If an OEM can make money doing it, I'm sure Red Hat would be willing to
talk with them about bundling RHEL - or they can adapt Fedora (being
careful of the trademark issues) themselves without too much difficulty.
7:46 a.m.
On Tue, 2006-04-25 at 04:08 -0700, Michael A. Peters wrote:
I would like to see "Install Software" (what you get by
right clicking
on an rpm file) patched to use yum localinstall rather than just rpm
directly - but other than that, right clicking on an application does
what should be done.
Have you tried double clicking an rpm lately, or downloading one from
Firefox? It uses the same backend code that pirut and pup use to
install it, as well as gathering deps IIRC.
--
Jesse Keating RHCE (geek.j2solutions.net)
Fedora Legacy Team (www.fedoralegacy.org)
GPG Public Key (geek.j2solutions.net/jkeating.j2solutions.pub)
8:26 a.m.
On Tue, 2006-04-25 at 08:46 -0400, Jesse Keating wrote:
On Tue, 2006-04-25 at 04:08 -0700, Michael A. Peters wrote:
> I would like to see "Install Software" (what you get by right clicking
> on an rpm file) patched to use yum localinstall rather than just rpm
> directly - but other than that, right clicking on an application does
> what should be done.
>
Have you tried double clicking an rpm lately, or downloading one from
Firefox? It uses the same backend code that pirut and pup use to
install it, as well as gathering deps IIRC.
Well, heh, if that's the case - then it does exactly what I want.
But no - I haven't tried with apps that need dependencies installed.
I'll do that and see what happens.
6586
days inactive
6590
days old
51 comments
24 participants
participants (24)
-
Alo Tsum -
Andy Green -
Arthur Pemberton -
Aurelien Bompard -
Benjy Grogan -
Callum Lerwick -
Camilo Mesias -
David-Paul Niner -
Erwin Rol -
Gilboa Davara -
Horst H. von Brand -
Jack Tanner -
Jef Spaleta -
Jesse Keating -
Joe Desbonnet -
Kevin Kofler -
Kostas Georgiou -
Lamont R. Peterson -
Leszek Matok -
Mark Rosenstand -
Michael A. Peters -
Nicolas Mailhot -
Paul W. Frields -
Rahul Sundaram