Fedora 19 Final blocker status: fix and karma requests

[drago01]

On Sun, Jun 23, 2013 at 6:54 AM, Adam Williamson <awilliam at redhat.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 2013-06-22 at 18:51 -0500, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
>> On Sat, 2013-06-22 at 11:00 -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote:
>> > I've filed an update with some 20 packages, only removing excess baggage
>> > from /usr/share/doc (duplicate docs, large ChangeLog files, etc). It
>> > touches nothing outside /usr/share/doc, so should be fairly safe to let
>> > in. That will probably only get us part of the way, so I've also cut
>> > some more things from the package set in the .ks file (gnome-system-log,
>> > deja-dup).
>> That's a shame; Deja Dup is an excellent GNOME 3 backup app, and
>> including it by default encourages good (encrypted) backup habits.
>>
>> But I guess something has to go if we care about 1 GB.  (It just seems
>> like such a strange target... I don't think you can buy 1 GB USB sticks
>> anymore.)
>
> It was the next 'obvious step up' from 700MB, and at the time was
> comfortable enough for everything we really needed. Stuff happened.
>
> Desktop team might be able to rejig things early in F20 cycle somehow,
> or we might have to go up in size again.
>
> Going too big does have consequences: a, say, 2GB download is pretty
> slow for some people,

1) Removing the limit does not mean you have to put in twice as many stuff in.
We are currently bikesheeding about a few MBs. Which is nonsense. If you
cannot download a few more MBs using Fedora with that internet connection
is rather pointless.

The end result is a worse default offering then we had before to save a few MBs.

2) We don't have to set a limit at all. Just include the stuff we want
to include (and try to optimize that to be as small as possible).

Just because someone decided "there has to be a size limit and if we
don't meet that target we block the release" does
not mean that this is the right thing to do (note: it isn't). A limit
only makes sense if you target a CD.