Introduction, Documenting Workstation
by Pete Travis
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
I'm acquainted with many of you already, but an introduction seems
fitting anyway. I've been involved with the project for a few years now,
primarily on the Docs team but also some light packaging and lately
light infrastructure things. I live in Montana, US, where the population
density is almost as low as the temperature. I work for a small
government agency doing user and systems support.
Why should you care? Well, the Docs team reached a decision this last
weekend to proactively work with the Product WGs to assess documentation
needs. I volunteered to liaison with the Workstation team. As we
approach the release cycle, I'd like everyone to keep documentation in
mind and the discussion open about not only implementation, but how to
represent that implementation to the users. An undocumented feature
isn't featured :)
I'm looking forward to working with everyone, perhaps saying hello at
the next meeting - there are meetings, right? - and developing a
presentation of the Workstation Product that shows off the capabilities
and character of your work.
- -- Pete Travis - Fedora Docs Project Leader - 'randomuser' on freenode
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
8 years, 8 months
Workstation status and TODOs
by Josh Boyer
We have just less than 3 months before the F21 Alpha change deadline
comes. That means that now is the time to get going in earnest on
making sure we have all the things we want lined up for the initial
release of Workstation done. Matthias and Christian have done a great
job of getting us started, and have gotten some major Changes
approved. The GNOME 3.12 rebase was accepted, and the enabling of
SCLs should go over fairly well once the questions are addressed.
So what is left? Off the top of my head I can think of:
1) Getting the kickstart for Workstation cleaned up with the
appropriate package lists (I'd be willing to get this rolling)
2) Integrating KDE into the above in whatever form we work out with the KDE team
3) KDE variant of Adwaita theme
4) Firewall/firewalld integration issues
5) Installation and compose methods work with rel-eng (live image
default, but install tree necessary for compose. PXE/netboot iso?
I'm sure I'm missing a few things here. Please chime in with what I'm
forgetting. In short, there's more than enough work to go around.
Lastly, we've been rather quiet as a WG as of late. The Cloud WG is
going through a confirmation process with their members to make sure
people are still interested and willing to do work. That's not a bad
idea for ourselves. WG members, please take the time to reply with
whether or not you wish to remain a WG member.
As an aside, much of the "heavy lifting" in terms of process is done
for this release. The PRD and Tech Specs have been approved, and the
initial round of Changes are submitted. Not being overly familiar
with the underlying code in much of the DE stacks, my participation
has been limited mostly to those kinds of process things. I think we
still have some discussions to have on process and interactions with
other groups, but I thought I would double check that the WG feels I'm
doing a decent job representing them in this capacity. I'm happy to
continue to pitch in where I can, but if the WG feels they'd be better
served by someone else as the FESCo liaison, please speak up.
8 years, 9 months
Desktop and FirewallD
by Christian Schaller
So in response to the ongoing discussion about Firewall functionality and the desktop we had a call at the end of last week with some representatives from both
the desktop and firewall development teams, trying to figure out a good compromise and a way forward. I hope people can take the time to look over the ideas we discussed and let us know if you think it is a workable solution.
On the call was:
We had a wide ranging discussion going from what is doable in the Fedora 21 timeframe to what we want from a firewall solution in the long run, what the setup is like on other operating systems, the tradeoffs between security and usability, API and adoption, ease of sharing versus unintended sharing and different corner cases where the different models might break down a bit.
We all agreed on the following core principles
* We want users to be as secure as possible
* We want users to have their privacy protected as well as possible
* We want users to have a good experience using our products
* We want users to be able to use services such as DLNA, Chromecast, Avahi and more without having to search on Google, and more often than not be told that the fix is to disable the firewall.
* We all agree that there is no perfect solutions on offer here. Just a range of different tradeoffs. A system with a running firewall isn't secure nor is a system without a firewall insecure. Instead they exist on a continium of 'more secure' and 'less secure'.
The challenges seen:
* With the current default a lot of services don't work out of the box because the firewall silently blocks them
* There doesn't seem to be any non-expensive way for the system to detect that a service is running and being blocked by the firwall.
* There is very limited use of the firewalld API for doing things like port unlocking and similar due to it being a predominately Fedora and RHEL only solution currently
* Some application developers who do look into using the current API find the API hard to use
* The current NetworkManager UI to change zones is both maybe a bit hidden away and also the Zones options listed there are not intuitive or documented in the UI.
Plans for Fedora 21
* The Desktop team will look into creating a UI that asks you when you connect to a new wireless network if you consider it trusted or not. Exact wording of the question and look of dialog etc. will need to be worked out. This setting will be remembered for that network. If user say trusted the zone used will be 'trusted', if not trusted then current default will be used. Should be simple enough to not confuse users, yet improve their security on public networks.
* Other connection types will keep the current default which sucks a bit for your home ethernet, but we don't currently have a good way to identify your ethernet connection and popping up a dialog every time you connect is
probably a worse user experience than having to google a bit.
Matthias started a prototype of this already here:
Long term plans
* Work with NetworkManager team to see if we can come up with a way to identify ethernet connections in a similar manner
* Look into proposing a new DBUS API for firewalld
* We will keep talking to see if there are more granular approaches that can be developed as we go forward. For many cases the trusted/untrusted question is a bit to simple. For instance you probably trust your work network, but that doesn't mean you want to share your beach vacation photos on the office network.
* Look into using the zones descriptions somehow in the NetworkManager Zone setting UI to make it a bit more understanable than just a list of names. FirewallD team will work on making the descriptions internationalizable.
Matthias filed two bugs related to this:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1091067 split off zone
configuration in subpackages
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1091068 overprotected api
8 years, 10 months
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
8 years, 10 months
Initial WS live image kickstart files
by Josh Boyer
Below are the initial kickstart files I have for the Workstation live
image. They started as copies of the existing Desktop files, and added
some of the packages we need like the QT and devassistant things. I've
composed a live image (1.2G) with them and it boots succesfully if you
disable SELinux (there's a bug filed for that).
How does this look as a start? The installed package list is also
fedora-live-workstation.ks | 65 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
fedora-workstation-packages.ks | 70 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
2 files changed, 135 insertions(+)
create mode 100644 fedora-live-workstation.ks
create mode 100644 fedora-workstation-packages.ks
diff --git a/fedora-live-workstation.ks b/fedora-live-workstation.ks
new file mode 100644
@@ -0,0 +1,65 @@
+# Maintained by the Fedora Workstation WG:
+part / --size 6144
+cat >> /etc/rc.d/init.d/livesys << EOF
+# disable updates plugin
+cat >> /usr/share/glib-2.0/schemas/org.gnome.settings-daemon.plugins.updates.gschema.override << FOE
+# don't run gnome-initial-setup
+# make the installer show up
+if [ -f /usr/share/applications/liveinst.desktop ]; then
+ # Show harddisk install in shell dash
+ sed -i -e 's/NoDisplay=true/NoDisplay=false/' /usr/share/applications/liveinst.desktop ""
+ # need to move it to anaconda.desktop to make shell happy
+ mv /usr/share/applications/liveinst.desktop /usr/share/applications/anaconda.desktop
+ cat >> /usr/share/glib-2.0/schemas/org.gnome.shell.gschema.override << FOE
+favorite-apps=['firefox.desktop', 'evolution.desktop', 'empathy.desktop', 'rhythmbox.desktop', 'shotwell.desktop', 'libreoffice-writer.desktop', 'nautilus.desktop', 'gnome-documents.desktop', 'anaconda.desktop']
+ # Make the welcome screen show up
+ if [ -f /usr/share/anaconda/gnome/fedora-welcome.desktop ]; then
+ mkdir -p ~liveuser/.config/autostart
+ cp /usr/share/anaconda/gnome/fedora-welcome.desktop /usr/share/applications/
+ cp /usr/share/anaconda/gnome/fedora-welcome.desktop ~liveuser/.config/autostart/
+# rebuild schema cache with any overrides we installed
+# set up auto-login
+cat > /etc/gdm/custom.conf << FOE
+# Turn off PackageKit-command-not-found while uninstalled
+if [ -f /etc/PackageKit/CommandNotFound.conf ]; then
+ sed -i -e 's/^SoftwareSourceSearch=true/SoftwareSourceSearch=false/' /etc/PackageKit/CommandNotFound.conf
+# make sure to set the right permissions and selinux contexts
+chown -R liveuser:liveuser /home/liveuser/
+restorecon -R /home/liveuser/
diff --git a/fedora-workstation-packages.ks b/fedora-workstation-packages.ks
new file mode 100644
@@ -0,0 +1,70 @@
+# FIXME; apparently the glibc maintainers dislike this, but it got put into the
+# desktop image at some point. We won't touch this one for now.
+# This one needs to be kicked out of @standard
+# We use gnome-control-center's printer and input sources panels instead
8 years, 11 months
Default font configuration doesn't look right on Fedora...
by Alex G.S.
Recently, well actually a few months ago, I filed a bug regarding the
default font configuration on Fedora installs. The default font
configuration just looks wrong and leads to browser font rendering in both
Firefox and Chrome that looks radically different from what it normally
looks like on Windows and Mac OS. Ubuntu manages to do this correctly and I
actually had to copy their font configuration to get things to look right.
This is a really annoying manual configuration step I really shouldn't
have to do with something as polished as Fedora.
This issue is critical because the web-browser is where we spend 90% of our
time and is the most important graphical application on any modern system
and the font-config should be properly set to optimize that experience.
Steps to fix this problem:
1. Install 'freetype-freeworld' from RPMFusion for LCD filtering.
2. Copy Ubuntu's font configs to '/etc/fonts/conf.d'
3. Enable RGB sub-pixel in the desktop environment font configuration.
Please take a look at the bug for more details.
So this leads to a few questions about how this is setup:
A) What is the scope of desktop environment based font-configuration?
Basically if I enable and configure this from the GNOME or KDE system
settings shouldn't it apply to all applications even the browser? If the
desktop environment fails to set the proper font anti-aliasing in the
browser is this a bug specific to that environment? Are there applications
that for technical reasons are separate from the desktop environment such
as Google Chrome that uses it's own font rendering engine?
B) Since the patents have expired shouldn't freetype-freeworld be included
C) Shouldn't system-wide font-config be controllable from a simple
Ideally a solution to this is to create a small application that runs in
the terminal that allows the user to set the system-wide font-config. This
way users don't have to manually edit the '/etc/fonts/conf.d' files. In
the short-term this should provide some relief.
8 years, 11 months
Deliverables and release engineering changes for Fedora.Next
by Jaroslav Reznik
As it seems, Fedora.Next and product planning leads also to changes
how Fedora is produced and how it's going to be distributed to our
For this, we need to collect product deliverables, so needed changes
for release engineering can be planned (and implemented) and as I was
talking to Dennis, we're are currently blocked on it.
I created rel-eng ticket - WGs, please, try to sum up required changes
there (in consumable way), so we have it in one place (for possible
overlaps in requirements etc).
Currently, Alpha Change Deadline is planned for no earlier than
2014-07-22, it's not as far as it sounds, especially if changes
in releng are needed. So let's try to work this out as soon as
I suppose, in the end, FESCo should approve requested changes in
product deliverables. So once requirements are collected, I'll
create (yet another) ticket for FESCo. Or even better - as Cloud
did - Change proposal would be the best solution, even after the
(Sorry for cross-posting;-).
8 years, 11 months