On Mon, 2013-10-28 at 13:32 +0000, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
On 10/28/2013 12:55 PM, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> == My initial thoughts ==
> I am open to counter-arguments, naturally.
I'm just going straight to the overlapping issues we have between the
WG's as in we need to establish the fundamental approach of which
applications belong to our group.
Basically where I stand any application that runs daemon/service as in
it's an application (or set of applications) that runs in the background
waiting to be used, or carrying out essential tasks on an pyshical/vm or
in container or in other words basically it's an systemd/upstart/sysv
unit/service or an container that can be started and enable with the
systemd and service commands and is not part of the desktop/graphical
target ( such as gdm.service which thus makes it part of the workstation
group ), as well is not part of the base/coreOS ( like device mapper etc
) it belongs within the server WG.
I tentatively agree, although I guess there may be desktop-oriented
daemons we may not care about. Say a desktop-oriented backup daemon,
that is sort of single user or anyway ill-suited for a multi-user
Also should we care much about Graphical UIs ? Or should we freeze early
and maintain whatever version was considered stable in the Desktop WG at
the start of the cycle ? And who is going to maintain it if we do so and
happen to have a longer term cycle than the desktop ?
Simo Sorce * Red Hat, Inc * New York