Criterion revision proposal: KDE default applications

[Rejy M Cyriac]

On 12/13/2013 12:55 PM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
> 
> On fös 13.des 2013 06:30, Adam Williamson wrote:
>> On Fri, 2013-12-13 at 05:31 +0000, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
>>> On fös 13.des 2013 02:05, Adam Williamson wrote:
>>>> It was clear at the Go/No-Go meeting today that KDE SIG does not
>>>> consider this release criterion applicable/desired:
>>>>
>>>> "All applications that can be launched using the standard graphical
>>>> mechanism of a release-blocking desktop after a default installation of
>>>> that desktop must start successfully and withstand a basic
>>>> functionality
>>>> test."
>>>>
>>>> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_20_Final_Release_Criteria#Default_application_functionality
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> jreznik says they consider the live image their 'polished product'
>>>> where
>>>> everything must work, while the DVD install is more of a grab-bag -
>>>> they
>>>> install a whole bunch of stuff, and don't think it's the end of the
>>>> world if one or two bits are broken.
>>>>
>>>> Given that, I propose re-wording as follows:
>>> You are trying to fix the problem on the wrong end thus leave the
>>> criteria as is.
>>>
>>> The installing should not differ ( or in other word be consistent )
>>> regardless if you install from the live or from the dvd the end result
>>> should be the same.
>>>
>>> You should have the same service enablement, the same desktop instalment
>>> and experience etc.
>>>
>>> So get releng to get their act together and fix that for the dvd so
>>> matches with the live.
>> Per my long reply on the other sub-thread, I'm fine with that if it
>> actually _happens_. But it's not releng's responsibility; it's the KDE
>> and desktop SIGs. They own this stuff: it's their responsibility to
>> choose what packages go in the lives and what packages are deployed when
>> you do a DVD install of their desktops.
> 
> The DVD is releng/fesco responsibility, they dictate and decide what's
> on it and what not and how it's delivered not the sub-community's.
> 
> There are other differences then just the package selection that get
> installed for example which services are enabled etc. compared to the
> lives.
> 
> I argue that we should get rid of the DVD it's an era of the past and
> just provide net-install iso and lives.
> 

I differ with you on this point. There are still so many places in the
world with limited/expensive/slow, or even no network connectivity at
all. In fact, it is only in the developed countries that broadband is
prevalent like water, and in the rest of the world, just like water, it
is a limited resource.

On a related note, folks in the developed world might be surprised to
know that 32-bit processors are still very much in use.

I work with the Free Media project of Fedora, and I know of so many
instances where providing the Fedora DVD (32 and 64 bit) has empowered
the lives of people and small organisations.

> Those lives should be under full control of the sub-community both in
> terms of size,partitioning, filesystem layout.filesystem type, package
> selection as well as service enablement even to the use an alternative
> installer but those sub-community should also be responsible for QA-ing
> ( testing/triaging  ) as well as the necessary release engineering work
> to release their own lives..
> 
> JBG


-- 
Regards,

Rejy M Cyriac (rmc)