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

Re: My 2 cents on the whole Fedora to succeed as global wide deployed desktop are...

Simo Sorce wrote:
On Mon, 2007-09-03 at 12:02 -0500, Les Mikesell wrote:
I doubt if there are 3 million people arrogant enough to call themselves experts, though. There are probably a few hundred configurations that an expert sysadmin would build for 99% of uses and the good ones would sort themselves out by reputation and be improved by user feedback. The base distribution could then just concentrate on getting all the programs into a repository and keeping their interfaces compatible so you didn't have to throw everything out to update.

You have heard about how Fedora has built an infrastructure to allow
very easily to create "spins", what do you think that has been built
for ?

You don't get it - I'm not interested in yet another limited set of choices on a custom CD that is already outdated by the time you download it. I'd like to see a framework to track an expertly-maintained system with little extra effort for the person doing the maintenance and none on the ones following it. If the admin adds or updates packages, the next update of the tracking machines should do the same.

From another email:
If free software distribution was really about sharing instead of providing a complex base to sell support and services, I think something like this would have been done long ago."

Can you spare us this ridiculous rhetoric ?

It is an overgeneralization, but not ridiculous. You can choose between distributions funded by support/service subscriptions or ones that don't care much about the user experience and just warehouse the code. I think we'd be better off with a way to share the support/service work and make user experiences reproducible in any quantity.

Fedora is now built to make it easy to build spins. Just publishing a
list of packages and let it die in oblivion is not going to help

Yes, that's exactly my point - the mechanism must permit tracking the continuous changes and updates made by the expert.

An expert willing to help others can instead build a spin and
really benefit other people, by providing them with a targeted
distribution without caring about packaging, but just about how to
select and put together packages and making sure you can build an
installable system, which is what your are asking for.

No, that will be wrong by the time it reaches a user's hands. The mechanism I want is a minimal install that gets yum or an equivalent on the internet. From there you pick an expert and a purpose for your machine and automatically get the set of packages installed in a tested, known-to-work, configuration just like an enterprise IT department might build for their desktops. Don't like it? Just pick a different one and the package manager would adjust the installed packages to match. Even if you have to try several know-working setups to get something you like it will be vastly easier than individually testing thousands of programs in all possible combinations yourself, and once you find a working master system you could always have an equally nicely working copy of it.

  Les Mikesell
   lesmikesell gmail com

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