Desktop Live DVD: diff

[Seth Vidal]

On Thu, 5 Nov 2009, David Zeuthen wrote:

> On Thu, 2009-11-05 at 11:55 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
>> Personally I think one of the nice things about a live CD image is it
>> creates a good restriction for building a nice focused working system in
>> a reasonable amount of space. 1GB would more or less keep that; 2GB is
>> starting to introduce an awful lot of wiggle room for not caring about
>> including useless crap.
>
> Nah, this is a bad reason - and if it's the case we're already doomed.
>
> (FWIW, I don't think it's the case - I trust Matthias and other Live CD
> desktop maintainers to put only sensible stuff on our images.)
>
> Also, no-one says we _must_ include useless crap or even use all of the
> space. And no-one says the space we're going to use is to be used for
> software. I've advocated earlier that we should try and promote things
> like Ogg Theora. For example, we could include
>
>  http://www.bigbuckbunny.org/
>
> on the media. In my view, that would make Fedora a lot more appealing.
>
>> And remember, large USB keys may be cheap as chips nowadays but
>> bandwidth ain't, always. Aren't there still people in Australia with
>> absurd caps like 10GB/month?
>
> They do have mirrors in Australia.
>
>> I'm not sure I like the idea, if the idea is 'stop doing a small
>> functional live image and make our smallest 'complete-out-of-the-box'
>> image 2GB big'.
>
> No one says the desktop image should be "our smallest
> 'complete-out-of-the-box' image". In fact, I think it would be a mistake
> to say it should be.
>
> Also: Remember the days before live CDs? Back then, about 3+ years ago,
> we didn't have any problems asking people to download a whopping six
> CDs.
>

Well, to be fair we didn't tell them download 6 cds. We told them, if they 
were bandwidth-restricted to download the boot.iso and boot and install 
via the net talking to a local mirror.


not disputing any other points - but it's not like the super-small image 
has ever been 6-cds.

-sv