Hash: SHA1

On 08/30/2014 10:42 AM, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
> On Sat, 2014-08-30 at 19:22 +0300, Elad Alfassa wrote:
>> I really don't undertand why "not installing the release notes" is
>> such a big change we need to wait for the next cycle to implement.
>> It's really just a one line change. And if we want to install them but
>> not provide a launcher (so they could be opened by a bookmark in
>> Firefox) than I'd happily provide a patch to split the launcher to a
>> subpackage.
> Eh, I'm just picking my battles here. A Release Notes launcher that
> starts Firefox is not good and we should get rid of it, but it's not
> very bad either and if the release notes people want another cycle to
> rethink how to present the release notes, well why not let them have it?
> Another thing we could do is add it as a default web app. GNOME Software
> requires "epiphany-runtime" which is all of Epiphany except the desktop
> file, so that it can install and remove web apps. Well, why not make the
> release notes a web app -- then the release notes team gets to keep the
> desktop launcher, and we are happy since it's a real application.

Someone had proposed that in #fedora-docs late yesterday, I like it.  I'm working on some copy right now, and will go for an ephiphany web-app style presentation in GNOME for the next RPM.

For the record, the collaboration part of my arguments here are *far* more important to me than the actual inclusion of a Release Notes RPM.  It's a valid discussion, and I would much rather start on that basis, instead of potentially missing a discussion about a design philosophy on a SIG list, then finding out about the impact when I learn that an RC isn't meeting release criteria because of my package.

- --
- -- Pete Travis
 - Fedora Docs Project Leader
 - 'randomuser' on freenode
 - immanetize@fedoraproject.org
Version: GnuPG v1