Draft Product Description for Fedora Workstation
jwboyer at gmail.com
Fri Nov 1 18:22:15 UTC 2013
On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 11:15 AM, Markus Mayer <lotharlutz at gmx.de> wrote:
> On 11/01/2013 03:24 PM, Christian Fredrik Kalager Schaller wrote:
>> Hi everyone,
>> Attached is the draft PRD for the Workstation working group. The
>> proposal tries to be relatively high level and focus on goals and
>> principles, but I have included some concrete examples at times to try
>> to provide some clarity on how the goals and principles could play out
>> in practice.
>> I hope the community at large will take the time to read through it and
>> provide feedback so that when the working group meet next we can use
>> that feedback to start tuning in on the final form of the PRD.
>> Also in the name of openness, before I sent this here, I showed the PRD
>> draft to key stakeholders and decision makers inside Red Hat, to ensure
>> that we have the necessary support for these plans to get the kind of
>> engineering resources allocated from Red Hat we will need to pull this
>> Christian F.K. Schaller
>> P.S. I am celebrating both our wedding anniversary and my wifes birthday
>> this weekend so I will not be able to be online a lot. That said I will
>> make the time to go online to check my email from time to time so that I
>> can respond to any questions that has come in, just don't expect
>> immediate answers from me this weekend :)
> Hi Christian,
> thank you for writting up the product description.
> Here are some things that came to my mind while reading it:
> - What about watching films, listening to music? I think it is a basic
> requirement for students (at least for me).
> Maybe we should add a that a student should be able to play videos and
> listen to music. It should be easy to install required codes
> (free/nonfree/patente) if they are available in the repositories (yes, I
> mean rpmfusion)
This would require approval beyond the WG, as it goes against Fedora's
policies. Note, I am not saying you are incorrect, just that it's a
conversation to be had elsewhere first.
> - You often refere to 'development environment with the latest web
> development tools'.
> Is there a reaseon why 'web development tools' are listed seperatly? What
> about C/C++ development tools? Are they just 2nd grade tools?
No, but they're already implicitly included considering every possible
DE used for the base of Workstation requires them to build. They also
aren't nearly as rapidly released as other tools.
> Am I assuming correctly that 'development environment' includes IDEs,
> SCM-Systems, editors, ...?
The actual specifics of the software installed aren't covered in this document.
> - Maybe we should add a statement, that it should be easy to install/use
> server components on a workstation install. Many developers need server
> components to test their code
Can't they can install the Fedora Server product in a virtual machine?
This document already explicitly mentions easy to configure virtual
machines as a goal. Trying to come up with something specifically
scoped while saying "oh, but you should also be able to morph it into
something else" isn't going to lead to a well defined product. That
isn't to say it isn't possible, or that it can't be done, but it isn't
necessarily a use case either.
More information about the devel