On Mon, Sep 1, 2014 at 4:09 PM, Bastien Nocera <bnocera@redhat.com> wrote:

Hey Pete,

----- Original Message -----
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> I'm working on the release notes here - should there be any special
> hardware recommendations for Workstation? The 'requirements[1]' drafted
> are deliberately open-ended, because Fedora can be stripped down or
> built up to run *something* on most any modern machine. Workstation is
> a specific thing though, and while LLVMpipe can [often?] get gnome-shell
> running, it isn't a great experience. Maybe not the UX context you want
> Workstation to be used in.
>
> Thoughts?

Can we split that into a "minimum" and "recommended" variants?

The minimum would be what's mentioned in "minimum system configuration" plus the
mention of "CPU accelerated graphics" and minimum resolution.

The recommended would be what's currently in "Minimum Hardware for Accelerated Desktops".
Possibly with 2GB of RAM (so that integrated graphics don't impact us quite as much).

Does that make sense?

Cheers

--
desktop mailing list
desktop@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop

Hey

I think 2GB is a good "recommended" value, and that 1GB should be the "minimal". From my tests in VMs, 1GB is barely usable (I assume that 1GB on actual hardware with non-integrated graphics would be a bit faster, but still).
However, "hardware accelerated graphics" shouldn't be in the minimal - people will still run Workstation on VM platforms where it's unavailable, eg. KVM/spice, we don't want them to think it's impossible to run our own OS on our own virtualization platform.
I think it would make more sense for "Hardware accelerated graphics" to be in the recommended section.

-Elad Alfassa.