On 10/17/2014 05:40 AM, Gerald B. Cox wrote:
My comment was not meant to be argumentative, but rather
tongue-in-cheek. However, I do believe when changing a default, it
isn't about what is convenient for me. It's about what is best for the
entire community and what are the real world ramifications.
IMO, the default should
be about "what fits most users needs bests".
I'll go out on a limb here and suggest:
1. Most people who can afford to pay the monthly recurring cost for a
high speed bandwidth connection have multi-core machines.
2. People who are running Fedora on multiple machines possess the skill
set to easily change the default and turn Presto off if they wish.
I can't speak for other countries, but in the USA low cost high
speed
bandwidth is not pervasive. We're fighting about net neutrality and the
FCC is trying to change the definition of a broadband connection.
The same applies
to my home country (Germany) and as I would guess
probably most of the "Western World".
What about the repositories and mirrors? Do they all have
unlimited,
cheap bandwidth?
Probably not all, but I guess, most of them have.
Who is the target demographic of Fedora?
I thought, we are
talking about "defaults"/"presets" and not about
disabling delta-rpms at all?
Changing the default would not be much a problem to me, but not
providing delta-rpms could likely become a problem.
People with single-core
machines and high speed broadband?
What about people with slow connections? Is our response to them "sucks
to be you?"
Yes, not everyone can afford to buy a new machine
Also keep in mind that we are in
the age of mobile platforms, i.e. a
"user's situation" isn't necessarily static. A user may prefer
"full
rpms" in one situation but may prefer "delta rpms" in another.
E.g. you may have a high-speed broadband at your "usual places" (at
home/in the office), but you may easily find yourself in situations with
access to a slow, unreliable and costly internet connection, were using
full rpms could be prohibitive.
Ralf