On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 3:18 PM, Simo Sorce <simo(a)redhat.com> wrote:
Sorry I am not sure what you mean here.
If you mean the Server image will never have a graphical UI I don't
think we are all on the same boat.
Not that I want to install such UI by default, but not all people are
comfortable managing headless servers, so the option almost certainly
needs to be there.
The UNIX CLI is, over time, less and less an acceptable interface.
It's good and efficient at what it has been originally designed for
(manipulating line-oriented text by experts - all those two- and
three-character commands and little languages).
It's not particularly great at interactive use when compared to an
efficient GUI (the command names and options inconsistent, many and
long; the configuration file format is even more inconsistent than the
command names and options; to use either of them one has to either
remember a lot of option names / config directives, or to constantly
It's not a particularly good programming environment either - no IDE,
no type checking / lint / code completion.
There are only two major interfaces worse than the UNIX CLI: A GUI
that was not designed to be efficient, and an application with a GUI
that doesn't have any programmable interface.
I think we should, over time, move towards a "G"UI (whether local or
web is an implementation detail in this) for one-time use, and an
actual API used by an actual, current-era, programming language, for
automated use. The CLI will obviously stay, both because many users
are comfortable with it, and because we can't replace it during this