On Wed, 2008-10-29 at 09:45 +0000, Richard Hughes wrote:
On Wed, 2008-10-29 at 10:38 +0100, Patrice Dumas wrote:
> I think that it should be done the other way around, propose the
> changes that affect the whole distro on th is list, listen to what
> people have to say, or, more importantly what code they have to
> propose if they don't like a given design, and then implement it with
> all the concerned parties.
I don't think it can work like that.
1. send a mail saying sendmail won't be on the default desktop install
2. heat hands on ensuing flames
The problem with fedora-devel-list is that the 0.01% of most technical
users are there, most unable to understand that normal people don't use
an smtp server or setup nfs.
The majority of the desktop users are using Windows.
The majority of the
non-technical population probably also hasn't heard about Fedora,
either.
If we include everything we've ever started by default in the
future
versions, and any of the latest cool new stuff, our boot times are going
to get longer,
Well, then something must have gone utterly wrong with
Fedora's
development ...
and our base install bigger.
Yes, the new developments have
blown them up. All contributed to the
bloat and the increasing demands on HW resources.
The older "features" didn't. vt1-6+vt7 have been around for ca. 15
years, nfs, sendmail, autofs, etc. also are around in Linux for very
long times.
Design by committee just doesn't work.
Design by tyranny
and design by suppression of minorities
doesn't work either.