Fedora.next Product Branding
by Ryan Lerch
*This is sent with my Fedora Design Team hat on*
With the creation of 3 products for Fedora, the Fedora Design Team
anticipates manynewquestions aroundFedora'sbrand. As the main caretakers
of the Fedora brand, weare going to have to figure these things out
within the next few months. For example, the Design Team is starting to
think about how to answer these types of questions:
• Should each product have its own logo? or
• Can you add our product to the Fedora website? or
• Can you make our product its own website? (How should we represent
these products on the website? Should we allow products to have their
own separate websites?)
To start off the rebranding discussion, the Fedora Design Teamhas4 basic
questions for each of the 3 product-focused working groups to answer:
(1) What problem does your product solve, in one sentence?
(2) Who is the target audience for your product, in one sentence?
(3) List at least 5 products that successfully target the same target
audience you are after.
(4) List at least 5 products that try to solve the same problem.
We are reaching out to each group individually to ask that you discuss
these questions and come back to us with answers by Wednesday, December
4th2013.
cheers,
ryanlerch
8 years, 10 months
Workstation PRD approval
by Josh Boyer
Hi All,
We have just shy of 6 calendar weeks until the PRD for Workstation is
due (Jan 13). However, with the holidays likely eating up a good
chunk of that it's realistically closer to a month.
We've had 5 revisions of the PRD Christian has drafted so far, with
some good feedback along the way. I don't think we're going to be
able to specifically list everyone's personal favorite use case in the
PRD itself, but the use cases we have should cover a broad set of
people already. I suggested moving the multiple-monitor and many
terminal windows items under e.g. the Corporate developer user case
and that should at least meet much of the technical requirements for
Sysadmins too (at least to start).
Ideally, I'd like to get a final PRD draft sent and approved by the WG
before the holiday break. That would give FESCo plenty of time for
review, and would allow us to get started in January on the next item,
which is a list of changes the WG would need from existing Fedora to
accomplish the PRD goals. I suspect that is going to take a
significant amount of work to settle, and the more time we have the
better.
If there are critical changes you think are needed for the PRD, please
speak up now and list them. That is particularly true for any of the
WG members. We can evaluate them as they come in.
Thanks.
josh
9 years, 2 months
Updated Fedora Workstation PRD draft
by Christian Schaller
Hi everyone,
First of all apologize for this taking so long, I ended up traveling
non-stop for some time visiting some of Red Hats desktop customers.
While not directly tied to the work of this working group I do hope to
take some of the lessons learned from those meetings with me into the
future work of the working group.
Anyway I tried editing the PRD a bit based on the feedback we got on the
first draft. I tried to make a few items a bit clearer and also to
include spelling fixes contributed and so on.
We probably want to do another WG meeting soon to discuss next steps.
Feel free to let me know if I forgot to include some important feedback
or if further clarifications are needed.
Christian
9 years, 2 months
Unannounced soname bump: tracker
by Adam Williamson
Sigh. Yes, another of these.
On 2013-12-18, tracker was bumped to 0.7.0:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=485698
the sonames of libtracker-extract, libtracker-miner and
libtracker-sparql were bumped to 0.18.so.0 (from 0.16.so.0) without
announcement, and without all dependent packages being successfully
rebuilt. At least the following still depend on the old sparql library:
bijiben-0:3.11.1-1.fc21.x86_64
brasero-0:3.11.3-1.fc21.x86_64
grilo-plugins-0:0.2.9-2.fc21.x86_64
media-explorer-0:0.4.4-5.fc21.x86_64
rygel-tracker-0:0.21.1-1.fc21.x86_64
I'll see if I can get any of them rebuilt.
What does it take for people to handle soname bumps properly?
--
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net
http://www.happyassassin.net
9 years, 2 months
FESCo decision on 3rd party repositories
by Josh Boyer
Hi All,
At the FESCo meeting today, the following things were decided on 3rd
party repositories. Some of this is specific to COPRs because those
are an odd case of 3rd party repositories.
1) COPRs can provide RPMS with .repo files in them because Red Hat is
the provider and assumes liability, but those cannot be included in
the main Fedora repos per FESCo decree.
2) COPR repos may be searched for applications to install as long as
the user is explicitly asked to enable the copr before installing
packages from them.
3) General 3rd party repositories cannot be searched or enabled due to
liability concerns.
(NOTE: "searched" in 2 and 3 was intended to cover searching by
software. Clearly users can manually search for anything.)
4) FESCo is okay with pointing to specific free software repositories
in the same way as COPR repos if they are approved by FESCo and Fedora
Legal. They are not limited in the criteria that they can choose to
apply.
5) For non-free sofware repositories, FESCo is not changing exisiting
policy. Non-free software repositories are not allowed. Permission to
make these discoverable via searching software would require a change
in policy from the Fedora Board.
In short, this means products can request approval of specific 3rd
party free software repositories. If approved, they can include their
contents along with COPR repos in application searches a user does and
offer to install them with a warning that they come from a 3rd party,
non-Fedora repo. Repositories containing non-free software cannot be
enabled by default or made discoverable through software.
josh
9 years, 2 months
F20 offline updates: way too frequent
by Michael Catanzaro
Since upgrading to Fedora 20, I've been prompted to restart and install
updates nearly every day. This seems non-ideal. (Or pick your favorite
loaded term: absurd, crazy, insane, ....)
It'd be nice to have a gnome-settings-daemon update that significantly
increases the default time between updates. (I'm thinking weekly.) I
know checking for updates is handled differently in Fedora 21: this
email is only about Fedora 20.
Michael
9 years, 2 months
Unannounced ABI change without soname bump in libevdev-0.6 in Rawhide (and F19 and F20...) breaks GNOME, probably other consumers
by Adam Williamson
Time for another PSA...
It appears libevdev 0.6 breaks the library's ABI without bumping the
soname (and without an announcement here or anywhere else I can find,
but an ABI change without an soname bump is just flat out wrong whether
announced or not). 0.6 was sent to Rawhide, F19 and F20 simultaneously.
The ABI change breaks GNOME in F20 and Rawhide (because clutter was
using the calls that disappeared in the 0.6 build):
undefined symbol: LIBEVDEV_READ_NORMAL (/lib/libclutter-1.0.so.0)
undefined symbol: LIBEVDEV_READ_SYNC (/lib/libclutter-1.0.so.0)
Dec 26 02:02:34 pressanykey gnome-session[1320]: gnome-shell: symbol
lookup error: /lib64/libclutter-1.0.so.0: undefined symbol:
LIBEVDEV_READ_NORMAL
Reported as https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1046426 .
Rebuilding clutter is not trivial at present, and in fact builds of
clutter appear to fail on this same libevdev issue. So right now, GNOME
in Rawhide is broken if you install libevdev 0.6, and this monkey
doesn't feel comfortable trying to fix it (I don't want to start
randomly whacking things in clutter's code to try and make it build
against the new libevdev). I recommend not installing this build, and
downgrading to 0.5 if you currently have 0.6 installed. If anyone from
the desktop team is able to get together with Peter and resolve this
SNAFU for Rawhide ASAP, that'd be great, though I realize we're all
supposed to be on vacation.
Happily, the update for F20 has already been negative-karma'ed out of
existence, and the F19 update is well on its way there. Take note, those
who say the update karma system is useless: without it, we would likely
have broken the world's F20 systems shortly after release...(F19's
clutter doesn't seem to use libevdev so GNOME on F19 doesn't break,
apparently, but the libevdev update still shouldn't go out).
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=486593 (Rawhide)
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2013-23934/libevdev-0.6-1.... (F20)
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2013-23961/libevdev-0.6-1.... (F19)
--
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net
http://www.happyassassin.net
9 years, 2 months
Live image / DVD package set merge
by Adam Williamson
Hi, folks. So as a quick test of the DVD / live package set stuff, I
just built an F21 live image from fedora-live-desktop.ks - rather than
fedora-livecd-desktop.ks .
Even with absolutely no tweaks or optimization, it comes out at the huge
size of...1.2GB.
So I think it's entirely feasible to bump the size target to 2GB, drop
fedora-livecd-desktop.ks entirely, and just build from
fedora-live-desktop.ks, giving the live image the same package set as
DVD. We wouldn't wind up with a crazy huge image or anything, and we'd
have lots of space inside the size target and not have to worry about
that problem.
There are certainly optimizations possible; if we did this, we could
focus more on optimizing things in comps. One obvious one is the dep
chain that pulls in perl. fedora-livecd-desktop.ks drops 'linux-atm'
from the live image to prevent perl getting pulled in and save space. In
comps, linux-atm comes in via the 'dial-up' group. So an obvious tweak
there is to move 'dial-up' from being a default group for GNOME to being
an optional group - this makes sense anyway, I think. People who still
use dial-up or plug directly into a PPPoATM modem or something can
select the group easily enough, everyone else doesn't get useless stuff.
If any of the other package drops on the live image make sense to
preserve for a larger live image and DVD install, we can look at how to
implement them in comps (ideally).
If people are interested in this I can come up with a concrete proposal
pretty fast, I think. Even with the whole three-product thing rolling
along, I think it makes sense to do this, since it wouldn't be
particularly difficult and would simplify things a lot; I think it's
possible that the 3 product stuff gets pushed out to F22, and if that
happens, it'd be nice not to have fuss about the size limit and
differences between DVD and live installs for F21 testing.
--
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net
http://www.happyassassin.net
9 years, 3 months
Small proposal (for a better acceptance of the PRD).
by Diogo Campos
Hi, I'm just a random user who cares (and uses) Fedora and GNOME.
I have been following this mailing list out of curiosity and noticed that
great people with the same (or similar) views are walking in circles about
the section "Target Audience" of the PRD.
Therefore, I would propose only an organizational (and aesthetics) change
that, I hope, could finally make everyone happy (or, at least, comfortable).
The change would be, more or less, as follows:
[...]
TARGET AUDIENCE
1 - General User.
(put a professional description here - it is basically the person who wants
a system that just works well in their device, and allows him to do all
kinds of things: job, hobby, entertainment, etc).
1.1 - Developer.
(this substitutes the current "General" paragraph - just copy almost the
same description from PRD)
1.1.1 - Student Developer.
(copy the description from PRD)
1.1.2 - Independent developer.
(copy the description from PRD)
1.1.3 - Small Company Developer.
(copy the description from PRD)
1.1.4 - Large Organization Developer.
(copy the description from PRD)
[Remove the "Other Users" section from PRD - cause it should now fit in the
"General User" section]
[...]
I am also sending an attached (amateur) illustration in order to make the
understanding of this change more visual - give a look. I think
this illustration (after improved, of course) can perhaps be included in
the PRD for the same purpose.
if I misunderstood some part, please correct me, and adapt the proposal.
If all this is just bullshit, please just ignore me.
Hope it helps.
9 years, 3 months
