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

Re: FESCo meeting summary for 2009-06-26



Bill Nottingham wrote:
> 17:33:02 <notting> "The current naming misleads users into either thinking
> GNOME is the only available desktop environment in Fedora or thinking the
> image also provides the other options." <- i don't really think either of
> these are accurate

Well, I don't see how that's not the case. OK, the description on the
download page says "GNOME" in small print, as you point out:
> 17:33:26 <notting> skvidal: the download page already says 'featuring the
> gnome desktop'
but other references to the "Desktop Edition" or "Desktop Live" don't, e.g.
the one on get-fedora-all, documentation, discussions etc. There's plenty
of potential for misleading users.

> My only other comments on the subject were questioning why you waited
> until you joined FESCo to propose this, when it didn't require that at
> all

Jef Spaleta nagged me about putting it before FESCo when the elections were
already underway. I decided to wait until after the election because it was
not a highly pressing matter and it was just a matter of a few days.

The thing is, any moment is as good as any other to file a proposal to
FESCo, I don't see why I *shouldn't* have filed it now. Surely I can't go
back in time and file it before the election (or even months before, when
nobody even told me to file it with FESCo). ;-)

I think saying "it has been like that for ages, you should have filed it
earlier" is a pretty weak argument against my proposal. Just because the
status quo has existed for a long time doesn't mean it can't be improved
upon.

> and a comment that the discussion was going in circles, which it was.

It was because you (plural) didn't want to listen to my arguments, you were
just eager to shoot my proposal down no matter what.

> But hey, thanks for the unfounded assertion that everyone who voted
> against it was operating under false assumptions, and they could not
> possibly have any rational reasons for disagreeing with you.

The arguments you (plural) have brought have been very weak. If there are
such "rational reasons", I'd like to read them!

        Kevin Kofler


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