Hi Adam,
Yes, some items might fall partly or fully upon the base WG, but we (as their
'customers')
need to clearly specify what we need them to deliver. The base WG todo list needs to be
based upon the needs and requirements of the 3 product WGs, not the other way around.
Christian
----- Original Message -----
From: "Adam Williamson" <awilliam(a)redhat.com>
To: "Discussions about development for the Fedora desktop"
<desktop(a)lists.fedoraproject.org>
Sent: Wednesday, February 19, 2014 3:49:42 AM
Subject: Re: technical spec for the workstation up for review
On Tue, 2014-02-18 at 16:24 -0500, Matthias Clasen wrote:
> I've spent quite a bit of time last week on this document:
>
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Workstation/Technical_Specification
>
> It is not 100% complete, but I haven't found the time to get back to it
> since Friday, so I should probably open it up for a first round of
> review to the other WG member.
>
> Let me know what you think,
Wouldn't...er...about the first four sections at least be the Base WG's
responsibility, in whole or in part? The Workstation specification might
want to link into bits of the base specification that might be of
significance to people developing to the workstation, but I'd be worried
if they started duplicating things.
"Account handling" may be something base also wants to cover in part,
and "software updates" (the dnf part), "miscellaneous system
information", pulseaudio part of "Media support".
Should there perhaps be some sort of "time limit" on "Even after the
switch, an X server will be included, so applications can either connect
to Wayland natively, or run as an X client."?
Thanks for the work!
--
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net
http://www.happyassassin.net
--
desktop mailing list
desktop(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop