On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 08:01:46AM -0400, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
But spins are Fedora, same as cloud image is still Fedora (and I
don't
see complaints it does not run Gnome Shell ;-). Desktop spin is one
spin of the many spins but we promote it (for several reasons) more than
others. So again - I don't see this as a problem with having ARM as PA
(I can see other issues like HW availability, build times, resources) but
having an ARM spin composed from primary builds with a DE that suits
still limited resources on ARM machines - no problem at all. Even blocking
desktop release criteria are fulfilled this way as we don't require for
example LXDE spin to ship Gnome and KDE ;-).
If I download the Fedora installation media, boot it, select all the
defaults and then reboot into the installed system, I get a well-defined
outcome. If we promote ARM to primary and treat it in the same way, the
well-defined outcome will be different depending on whether I pick ARM
or x86.
If I go to
fedoraproject.org, the first thing I see is a picture of
Gnome Shell with "Fedora 19" written underneath it. How do we deal with
that in the ARM case? Add a disclaimer indicating that if you pick this
outwardly identical install image for a different architecture, you'll
end up with something that looks entirely different?
Almost-but-not-quite Fedora are remixes. Even now Fedora ARM is
Fedora,
just a secondary architecture - it's actually more a technical detail
where the builds are done. So we already consider it Fedora! It's not
going to change with ARM being primary.
It's not a secondary architecture because it's built on different build
infrastructure. It's built on different build infrastructure because
it's a secondary architecture, and being a secondary architecture means
we don't make the same guarantees to users.
From a practical point of view: how many of the proposed new features
for F20 would be absent from the ARM release? How are we going to
communicate that?
--
Matthew Garrett | mjg59(a)srcf.ucam.org