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

Re: Abandon "Default Desktop"

On Sat, May 2, 2009 at 10:04 AM, Lennart Poettering
<mzerqung 0pointer de> wrote:
> So, before discussingwhether or not to feature KDE more prominently or
> even in the default install please come up with the necessary
> resources for development, support and suchlike to come even remotely
> near to what we can provide for GNOME.

When we talk about bring resources to the table..do we have a good
idea of what sort of bar to meet?  If for example our current KDE SIG
championed a lobbying campaign for Nokia resources for the KDE effort
in Fedora, what would they need to shoot for?

I don't have a problem with a "put up or shutup" challenge when it
comes to development resources and long term Fedora policy. I sit
outside the Red Hat fenceline (Ralf can't dismiss my opinion on the
same grounds as he has done to Jesse and Rahul but I'm sure he'll find
a way) and I can say that I generally agree with what Jesse has
previously said concerning Red Hat, Gnome and Fedora policy.
I have no delusions about Fedora and Red Hat interests being intertwined.

The question is what is the resources bar that must be met to give
other interests outside of RH a bigger stake in long term Fedora
policy? I don't have an answer to that. I wish I did.  I'd very much
like to be able to give the KDE SIG an affirmative roadmap they could
use to marshal support and to show sufficient resource commitment
along the lines of what you are talking about. But the last thing I
want to do is set a sliding bar that can never be reached. Without
that sort of sufficiency definition, your challenge is very difficult
to implement.


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