On 10/28/2013 02:15 PM, Bill Nottingham wrote:
"Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" (johannbg(a)gmail.com) said:
> You never deploy a desktop on a server so I would say we would limit
> this to a base/coreOS a set of administrative tools + a single
> application and or a application stack and the way we would deliver
> the products would be something that we would limit to netinstall +
> ks or something that integrades well with provisioning tools
I wouldn't say "never", given that somewhere around 20% of the users of a
Fedora-downstream distribution do install a desktop on their server, as of
a random sampling of a user subset done a while back.
20% actually sounds a bit low, given what we see on the CentOS side.
Given, that sample should be followed up on to see *why* they do it
(unfamiliarity with CLI/used to Windows, bad defaults in installer, other
reasons?). In fact, if we're being forward looking where *everything* is
deployed at large-scale, then this number should be expected to go down as
fewer people are doing single-digit deployments. But the need may still
exist for some people.
We see this also as a dependency requirement for various 3rd party
software. For example, Oracle, some printserver software, ArcGIS, and
several FlexLM intergrated apps all want at least some portion of a gui
to run. Not all of them handle a forwarded display properly. Some link
directly to firefox to display their documentation.
The CentOS Project | http://www.centos.org
twitter: @BitIntegrity | GPG Key: FA09AD77