I have installed Fedora 22 Alpha release, kernel 4.0.0-
Evolution version 3.16.0.
When I click on any saved mails (including drafts), evolution brings
up a warning message in the message window (please see attached). Any
help would be much appreciated.
I've just used fedup to upgrade to f22. fedup worked really well
(hooray!). Now that I'm down to using the system normally, I've
noticed that I get asked for my gpg passphrase each time I send a gpg
signed e-mail. This was not so in F21. Would someone know what has
changed? This should be documented somewhere IMO - users that will
notice this change should easily be able to find what's changed and if
anything is being done about it.
Stephen pointed me to a bug he's already filed, but it doesn't have
enough info on it yet:
Ankur Sinha "FranciscoD"
So I noticed this article today on Linux.com, the author was writting it after using Fedora Workstation 22 Alpha, hopefully it is a preview of what is to come.
A big thank you to everyone in the Fedora and Desktop teams for their efforts here!
"I’ve been an advocate of change on the Linux desktop for some time—at least until Ubuntu Unity came around. Once I started using Canonical’s entry into the desktop space, the race (for me) was over. Unity was my choice. I was fairly certain it would take a massive improvement on the desktop to get me to move away from my default.
That improvement might have come along—with the number 3.16. I’m talking about GNOME. The latest iteration of what was once the ruling king of the Linux desktop has made a strong case for wooing me away from Unity."
"I can say with confidence that GNOME 3.16 is the single most polished iteration of the GNOME desktop to date. In fact, I would go so far as to say this might well be the sleekest Linux desktop to ever be produced. Every single element of the desktop has been well thought out and realized, the interface is smooth and easy to use, and nothing seems extraneous or unwarranted."
I don't see any release criteria for printing capabilities, local or
remote. Should there be? I just stumbled onto this:
I haven't tried to reproduce so I don't know what the scope is,
whether it's a network printer (built-in server of some kind) or a
CUPS managed remote printer. But the apparent combination of firewall
blocking IPP by default (and permitting it fixing this problem) and
Fedora 21 Workstation didn't ship firewall-config by default either,
seems to be a setup for bad UX. Hence, should there be some sort of
print related criterion? What should it be? And for which release?
There's a lot which is of interest here, but this jumped out at me:
Breakdown by OS:
* 58.3% Windows 7 & 8
* 21.5% OS X
* 20.5% Linux
Which is awesome and encouraging for desktop Linux. However, the
breakdown of distros (from 4667 responses) is:
* 12.0% Ubuntu
* 2.2% Debian
* 1.6% Mint
* 1.3% Fedora
* 4.0% Other
So... we've got some Room for Growth there. :)
Unfortuantely, Stack Exchange didn't ask distro version in previous
years, but this'll at least give us a number from here. (For OSes as a
whole, the shift seems to be entirely from Windows XP and 7 to Windows
8 — desktop Linux is basically flat and OS X gains a few percent over
the past two years.)
I wish they asked about deployment / target OS, too.
You can see some of the demographics further down the study — about a
third (32%) are full-stack web devs, 14% are students, 10% do back-end
web devs, 9% mobile, 8% desktop, 6% front-end web, and then enterprise
developers of various stripes at 2.9%.
Fedora Project Leader
Does anyone want to add something to the agenda for today's WG
meeting? It starts at 1300 UTC / 09:00am EDT.
Since there is no agenda yet, I propose we cancel this week unless
somebody proposes an agenda item. :)
Broken from the "Summary of Reddit thread".
Fedora's lack of a graphical major-version updater comes up
constantly. I think it's probably time to start brainstorming how to
solve it, with a stated intention of having things work for upgrading
Fedora 23 -> Fedora 24 *at minimum* and an ideal situation of having
Fedora 22 -> Fedora 23 upgrades work (with changes made during Fedora
22's stable lifecycle to support this).
So to brainstorm, I'll start with a list (in no particular order) of
things I think we want as goals (not necessary technical goals but
user experience goals) and then go into a few known technical
enhancements that need to be accomplished to get there. (Note: many of
the experience goals may already be possible with some combination of
GNOME Software and/or fedup, but they are included for completeness).
Much discussion welcome!
p.s. I am not a member of the Workstation WG, but I am a highly-
== User Experience Goals ==
* The user must be informed that a major-version upgrade is available
soon after it is released in a manner that is consistent with the
integrated operation of the system.
* The user must have the option to "snooze" this notification for a
sensible amount of time (or permanently) to avoid nag.
* The mechanism must be capable of informing the user of how much
disk space will be required to perform the update prior to their
* The upgrade mechanism must *not* download any files other than
metadata prior to a user request for upgrading.
* The upgrade mechanism, once requested, must download all packages
to be upgraded locally before starting (to avoid network issues in the
middle of the upgrade process).
* The distribution upgrade mechanism *must* take place in a dedicated
upgrade environment with no other services running.
* The updater must be capable of first updating *itself* to the
latest stable version prior to attempting an upgrade. This *may* also
require updating all packages on the local system to their latest
versions, if needed.
* The resultant state of the machine after an upgrade should be
equivalent to a freshly-installed system of the new version,
configured the same way as the previous version.
* Once the system has entered the dedicated environment, the updater
should complete successfully or else make no changes to the
installed system, when only Fedora repositories are enabled.
* The update notification should be configurable to support upgrades
to Alpha and Beta releases, if desired.
== Non-goals ==
* It is not a requirement to be able to downgrade from a successful
== Technical implementation thoughts ==
* For Fedora Workstation, the obvious graphical front-end should be
* ... However, the low-level should be implemented by PackageKit so
that other DEs can implement their own solutions.
* The fedup tool already provides a non-graphical implementation of
the dedicated upgrade environment (as well as some odds-and-ends for
managing changes that aren't handled by simple package upgrade
scripts). This logic should be moved to PackageKit and maintained
there, with fedup becoming a CLI client implementation of it.
* The Fedora infrastructure would need to add new metadata to
describe releases (also supporting Alpha and Beta releases) that the
upgrade mechanisms may query for. Mirror-manager is probably a good
place for this.
* From a user perspective, GNOME software should provide AppStream
metadata for a Fedora N+1 package, which would have special properties
of enabling the distribution-upgrade. (Modeled somewhat after OSX
upgrades which are done by "purchasing" the new version in their OSX
* When the user receives a notification for a distribution upgrade,
clicking on that notification should bring them to the upgrade entry
in GNOME Software (or other tool as appropriate to other spins).
 Definition malleable.
 I hate the word "should", but I don't want *every* edge case as a
On Mon, Apr 06, 2015 at 10:15:35AM -0400, Joe Brockmeier wrote:
> Hey all,
> Have put up the page for talking points for this release:
> What we want to get to is a coherent story for Fedora 22 so marketing
> can weave that into the beta and final announcements, plus Ambassadors
> can use the talking points when they're at events (etc.), and for
> anybody who's talking to press about the F22 release.
> Cross-posting to working group lists to get feedback on the Cloud,
> Server, and Workstation editions.
I got a start on these:
However, I think we could use more information that sums up some of
the under-the-hood work but focuses on the benefit to the *user*.
This gets back to a point I was making in IRC the other day, that we
need a better high-level story for F23 under which work is aligned.
New incremental improvements are great and highly commendable. A new
GNOME release always has lots of great stuff in it.
But what's our goal for the larger developer story? How do we give a
developer a one-stop solution where they can fork a project, create
code, build, test(?), package (if desired), publish to community,
maybe deploy? That problem won't be solved by e.g. repos or a better
Paul W. Frields http://paul.frields.org/
gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717
http://redhat.com/ - - - - http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/
The open source story continues to grow: http://opensource.com
I came across this Reddit thread* about why devs use Mac OS X instead of Linux. I tried to pick out a representative set of comments below as I thought it could be a useful exercise to help us refine or reinforce our efforts around the Fedora Workstation. Being human there probably is some confirmation bias in my selection of quotes, but hopefully not to much :)
I think a lot of these items are things we are already aware of and trying to fix, but of course not all of them are easily fixable, like access to proprietary Windows or MacOS X applications or similar hotkeys/behaviour across UI toolkits. I think we made some great strides in the stability department, but reading the reddit thread did reinforce that it is an area we need to keep focus going forward.
"I'm one of the only linux users in a mostly mac web dev shop. The sense I get from everyone else is they don't want to play sysadmin or tweak all the things. They put 100% of their brain cycles into getting shit done. Taking a half hour here or there to google for better xbm icons for their tiling WM's bar is not part of their day."
"I play in Linux and work on a Mac (or work on Linux servers through the terminal). Just because I have the knowledge doesn't mean I want to put in the effort when there are other things I'd rather be doing."
"Seriously long battery life"
"Access to commercial apps like Excel and Photoshop"
"The desktop looks OK, not spectacular, but it generally stays out of the way and lets us get on with the work."
"Sure, I'd prefer to have a pure linux working environment, but it's not worth the heartache of figuring out why last weeks update broke my multi-monitor, again. I've got stuff to do, and OSX is good at allowing me to get that stuff done."
"Experience on a Linux desktop is so dependent on the hardware that is running. There should be a buying guide where folks have tested everything under the hardware. My bet is that if hardware manufacturers experiences a significant jump on their products, they'll start watching more carefully and will want to be on that recommended list."
"Close to all applications on OS X follow the design guidelines, and if you can navigate one application, then you can likely navigate them all. On Linux the UI is a mess of different UI libraries that all look and act differently. Sometimes a central enforcement of things is actually a good thing."
"I find OS X to be much more polished than any Linux GUI I ever used. Are there any Linux distros that automatically adjust the LCD and keyboard backlight when ambient light changes?"
"There's absolutely nothing that will ever make me switch to desktop Linux from OSX. Anything I want to do requires Googling, complex CLI operations, and usually takes a few "solutions" before things actually start working or are fixed while doing untold damage along the way."
"I don't want to fiddle with config files, /etc, anything anymore."