rlerch at redhat.com
Tue Jan 20 17:39:32 UTC 2015
On 01/20/2015 12:30 PM, drago01 wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 6:04 PM, Ryan Lerch <rlerch at redhat.com> wrote:
>> On 01/20/2015 11:03 AM, drago01 wrote:
>>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 4:16 PM, Ryan Lerch <rlerch at redhat.com> wrote:
>>>> Hi all,
>>>> I have been working on a feature proposal for a while now to propose
>>>> cleaning up the wallpapers that we present to the user by default in
>>>> Workstation. It has been on the agenda for the last few meetings, but we
>>>> have run out of time in those meetings :(
>>>> Basically, the proposal is to clean out the wallpapers that we currently
>>>> present to the user, and just show:
>>>> 1. The default fedora wallpaper for the release (the one created by the
>>>> Fedora Design Team)
>>>> 2. The default wallpaper for the upstream desktop release (e.g. the
>>>> GNOME wallpaper for the release of GNOME being shipped)
>>>> 3. A new set of 15 alternative default wallpapers chosen from the past
>>>> Fedora supplemental wallpapers. The supplemental wallpapers are a set of
>>>> wallpapers (that change every release) that are included in the repos for
>>>> people to install and use. The idea here would be to choose 15 of the
>>>> from all past supplemental wallpaper packages to be included by default.
>>> Semi related we should do something about this ever changing
>>> wallpapers ... hit me multiple times that after an upgrade I end up
>>> with a white wallpaper because the file was removed. Not that big of
>>> an issue but it looks bad.
>> Hmmm, i have never had this issue. Usually the package that supplies release
>> n-1 stays around for release n for me. The upgrade shouldnt remove
>> previously installed packages should it?
> No but files. If foo-1.0.rpm ships whatever.png and foo-1.1.rpm no
> longer ships it ... its gone.
each wallpaper for a release is in a new package for each release. This
allows someone to install the older or newer wallpapers on their system
if they wish. prior to f21, these packages were named by the codename,
but with f21 not having a codename, the name of the package itself has
21 in it, not the version (the package names all start with f21-backgrounds)
I assume this might have happened between a beta / final step where the
package name will not change, but the name of the file it ships might.
But this shouldnt happen between versions.
More information about the desktop