[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: PROPOSAL: Core size reduction "bug day"



On Fri, 23 Jul 2004 19:24:21 -0700, Mike Fedyk <mfedyk matchmail com> wrote:
> If you don't, I rest assured you'll regret it when the first few users
> install FC3 and say "there's no kde! Red Hat has..blah...blah......"

Basic fact, no matter what happens and when it happens as a result of
any discussion about where to draw the line and how delicate the line
is between core and extras, people are going to be unhappy. If Core
isn't cut down people will be unhappy...and if Core is cut down in
significant ways people will be unhappy. Don't doubt it.  I'm
personally not looking forward to the senseless bloodletting that a
general discussion about how to amputate Core is going to entail. The
thought of going through Core package by package in a mailinglist, and
worse irc, having the same damn fight over and over again turns my
stomach.  We aren't going to get anywhere other than burned out and
bitter unless there are some clear guidelines expressing what Core
functionality entails and some objective technical merit yardsticks to
hold up libraries and applications against. And a multi-release plan
so that we don't see crap bounce into fc3 then out of fc4 then back
into fc5 then out of fc6, just becuase fine scale technical
superiority of one application versus another keeps flipping every 4
months.

Everyone who want a preview of what a smaller Core is going to taste
like, search around for the 2 cd set of the fc1 publisher edition and
install it.  As a starting point to the 'how the frell do we make Core
smaller' debate I want specifics on how Red Hat has traditionally
chosen how to create the 2 cd publisher editions, as historical
perspective on how to compromise so that nobody in the process is
happy. That's what this call for a general unorganized and unguided
debate is going to lead to...a compromise solution that leaves
everyone unhappy (well everyone except for me I'm perfectily happy
saying 'I told you so' when it goes horribly wrong)

I humbly suggest that the name space of Fedora is going to have to get
a bit bigger to hold an installable set of media beyoond just Fedora
Core before we can even talk about squeezing Core down at all and
actually have a constructive conversation, or else your going to see
everybody's niche situation want to be something Core needs to deal
with and dig their heels in about it.  Be it general purpose
workstation or general purpose desktop or 1 cd microdistribution or
livecd or a distro that can handle low end hardware meant for places
like non-US schools, Core isn't going to service all situations, so
before we can talk about how to pull crap out of Core people need to
think long and hard about all the easily listed install situations you
want Fedora to be useful in and open up the namespace to allow for
more than just Core as installable mediasets, or to use Tiemann's
term... installable collections.  I'd much rather see the namespace of
installable sets open and let community step up and craft targetted
install sets solely from software in Core/Extras.  So we can have
Fedora Micro and Fedora Live and Fedora Light and Fedora Twinkie and
Fedora Speed Metal  and Fedora Kiosk , so whatever the very narrowly
defined target install Core is designed to meet the other interests
can have a place to live in the Fedora namespace but won't have a
compelling need to drag Core into a crappy compromise situations among
niche install situations.

And of course... all of this has to wait for reasonable community
contributor access via the on-going internal work that Red Hat is
doing, that gafton told us about in this list awhile ago.


-jef"who the hell half-emptied my glass full of air and put water in it?"spaleta



[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]