Does Fedora want to expel KDE from its offerings?

[Patrick O'Callaghan]

On Mon, 2014-12-15 at 02:47 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> 
> > On Sun, 2014-12-14 at 13:34 +0100, Richard Z wrote:
> >> do we really need any of it for fedup? I would think people use fedup to
> >> upgrade, not to switch to a different product.
> > 
> > If that were true, we wouldn't need any options and fedup would just
> > upgrade whatever the user already had.
> 
> That's the point.
> 
> Those options were added to FedUp (and forced to be used by just refusing to 
> proceed by default instead of simply defaulting to --product=nonproduct) 
> with almost no evidence of user demand. (When I asked, they had to admit not 
> having any real data, they only "asked around" in a group composed mostly of 
> GNOME developers to find that upgrading to a Product was the "expected" 
> behavior.)

Interesting. I wasn't aware of the background.

> >> Why would a gnome user want to type "fedup --product=workstation" instead
> >> of "fedup --product=nonproduct" - other than because of the misleading
> >> commandline options?
> > 
> > Sorry, can't parse what you're getting at here.
> 
> He's saying that the expected behavior of FedUp is clearly
> --product=nonproduct and thus that should be the default or only option 
> instead of being required to be explicitly passed (and I agree with that).

That makes sense in most cases (i.e. as a default). I do think it useful
to have the option of changing at upgrade time though.

> > Part of my objection is simply to the term "product", which I think is
> > unfortunate. I was pushing "model" as slightly better.
> 
> "Product" is being replaced anyway because Red Hat Marketing doesn't like it 
> (because Fedora is not a commercially supported product of Red Hat), the 
> Council is looking for alternatives, with "Flavor" being the current working 
> term. So you can propose the "Model" term to the Fedora Council.

My problem with "flavor" is that it's misspelled :-)

poc