Your input is needed: Fedora workstation comps group

[Stephen Gallagher]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 05/22/2014 08:04 AM, Elad Alfassa wrote:
> On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 2:51 PM, Stephen Gallagher
> <sgallagh at redhat.com <mailto:sgallagh at redhat.com>> wrote:
> 
> We should probably arrange it so that both the Workstation and
> Server products follow the same approach for dealing with comps.
> 
> 
> Absolutely. Care to ask the Server WG how are they going to name
> their comps? I know it sounds like bikeshedding, but we can't
> really proceed without a name, and changing the name later might be
> problematic.
> 
> I think that the most ideal setup would be to have one group named 
> fedora-workstation and another named fedora-server.
> 

I agree with you. I'll propose it to the Server WG and get back to you.


> 
> In my ideal world, it would be possible during a net install for us
> to have a single high-level package selection in Anaconda that
> was:
> 
> * Fedora Workstation * Fedora Server * Fedora Custom (Leading to
> the traditional dialogs).
> 
> Thoughts?
> 
> 
> In my opinion we don't need to change the current Anaconda UI like 
> you're suggesting: Workstation will be installed from Live where
> you don't have package selection, while Server will be installed
> (probably) from DVD. We can have the DVD default to Server, and
> people could still change it in the current Anaconda software
> selection, or however the Server WG wants to handle this.
> 

That's one approach, but do you really want to disallow the
possibility of installing Workstation from a network tree?

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/

iEYEARECAAYFAlN99UgACgkQeiVVYja6o6NDEQCggJNlR4f8FvmqledTt+WXg3DS
njgAnjr8BL98oKiOZ24wDRXi50YX3NzM
=uwo7
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----