Re: F42 Change Proposal: Fedora Plasma Workstation (System-Wide)

[foxt https://www.kalzumeus.com/2010]

>  KDE Plasma seem to be more technically advanced than GNOME.

The problem is, the more technically advanced a system is, in many cases, the 
less user friendly it is. For example, when you're confusing people who are 
actual software engineers by asking them if they want a Blowfish encrypted KDE 
Wallet or a GPG encrypted KDE wallet when they just want to launch a chat 
application, you've thought too much about said technical advancement.

I have no qualms with KDE being promoted much more than it is, but I feel like 
a user who doesn't know or care should be directed to GNOME, as its likely a 
better fit for those who choose the path of less resistance. Maybe have it be a 
toggle, similar to how the beta releases are presented.
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Fedora Plasma Workstation (System-Wide)

[Björn Persson]

Vít Ondruch wrote:
> In any case, I prefer to use Gtk apps for Gnome and I assume this is the 
> case for Gnome users. Similarly I won't be surprised if KDE users prefer 
> QT apps.

I suppose there might be some people who get so emotionally attached to
a widget library that they don't want to use programs that use another
widget library. Personally I use what works acceptably for my needs
regardless of which widget library it's built on. I edit photos in Gimp
(the origin of GTK) even though I currently use a desktop built on Qt.
I edit text files in Kate (a KDE program) regardless of which desktop
I'm using. I used Kmail for many years, even in Gnome 2 at times, until
Kmail became so bad that I had to switch to Claws Mail, which happens to
use GTK. I even used to endure Gnome Calculator's annoying Gnome-3-ness
because it was the best calculator I had until it recently stopped
working. I hope I'm not alone in using what works instead of getting
hung up on widget libraries.

> Mixing the DE and frameworks might not always work without issues.

That's not usually a crippling problem in my experience. Each time the
desktop I use breaks down, I switch to another. So far I've always been
able to find one that could be configured to work acceptably. It's
annoying when I have to spend time on that, but fortunately most of the
important programs tend to survive. It would be really horrible if I'd
have to log in to one desktop for programming and then switch to
another for photo editing or word processing. Let's hope the discord
never gets that bad.

If I can manage to set a sensible theme that exists for both Qt and GTK,
then most programs will look similar enough to not distract me from my
work – except for those Gnome 3 programs that refuse to obey the theme.
(And Firefox which just has to be different, but that has nothing to do
with desktops or widget libraries as far as I can see.)

Björn Persson


pgp3XcsfmYYXs.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signatur
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Fedora Plasma Workstation (System-Wide)

[Kevin Kofler via devel]

Peter Boy wrote:
> Well, a switch from Gnome to KDE would require a lot of changes in
> everyday applications, e.g. Mail. That is not required when you update
> from Gnome 2 to Gnome 3.

Well, in principle, GNOME applications will usually work under Plasma and 
the other way round. But in practice of course most default applications on 
the Edition would change along with the desktop environment. So if you are 
one of those users who never upgrades, but always reinstalls from scratch, 
or at least installs everything in the Edition's group on upgrades, you will 
be in for a few surprises indeed.

> Provide a reliable solution which includes a non breaking evolvement of
> the Edition.

I would argue that people upgrading to a newer Fedora should just upgrade in 
place with the packages they have installed, ignoring the new defaults of 
the Edition, so they would remain on GNOME and GNOME applications if that is 
what the release they had initially installed was shipping.

Though of course then there will be some people complaining that an upgraded 
Workstation is completely different from a freshly installed Workstation. 
But IMHO, that would be a feature, not a bug.

> Too bad, an explicit scientific desktop edition might have helped me
> propagate a Linux desktop in our University research cluster of excellence
> a good decade ago.  Scientific Linux for Servers was a great success.

We tried, but it was deemed not distinctive enough to warrant an Edition, 
our application was rejected on those grounds. After all, it was still a 
desktop spin, just with some scientific applications preinstalled on top of 
it. So it was accepted just as yet another Spin (next to the regular KDE 
Spin), and eventually the Labs category was created for this and other use-
case-specific (former) Spins.

So a Scientific Spin (now Scientific Lab) did in fact exist around a decade 
ago, but maybe "a good decade ago" was slightly too early, just before it 
was created.

In addition, there was also pushback against this suggested compromise 
(having the Plasma Edition be a Scientific Edition) from non-scientific KDE 
users who understandably did not want to have to install a Scientific 
Edition and then uninstall lots of niche apps they will never use from it. 
But that discussion became moot because the Edition application was rejected 
anyway.

Kevin Kofler
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Fedora Plasma Workstation (System-Wide)

[Kevin Kofler via devel]

Leslie Satenstein via devel wrote:
> The Cellphone user is very comfortable with Gnome. So much so, that I
> believe that if he was given KDE as the interface, two things would
> happen. a) The user will switch to Gnome, or b) The user will find a way
> to add his favourite applications to the desktop.

b) is actually very easy on modern Plasma (I tried it on Plasma 5), just 
right-click on the application in the menu and click "Add to desktop" in the 
context menu. KDE upstream has long given up trying to deprecate desktop 
icons (as they tried to do in early Plasma 4 releases, though even those 
allowed you to put a folder view widget displaying the Desktop folder (and 
hence, icons) on the desktop). In Plasma 6, the desktop is always a folder 
view.

Or the user can just switch the menu type to something icon-based and very 
similar to the menu in GNOME Shell with right-click on the menu button, 
"Show Alternatives…" and "Application Dashboard".

And if the user really wants a smartphone UI with a smartphone-style menu, 
always-maximized windows, etc., they should use Plasma Mobile, not Plasma 
Desktop. But a customized Plasma Desktop as described above is probably a 
better fit for traditional desktop/notebook computers.

Kevin Kofler
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Fedora Plasma Workstation (System-Wide)

[Kevin Kofler via devel]

Tomasz Torcz wrote:
>   GNOME (Mutter) maximizes windows if they initially take 80% of more
> screen space.

And I believe that that, too, was a refinement added in later releases. 
IIRC, GNOME 3.0 just maximized everything.

Kevin Kofler
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Fedora Plasma Workstation (System-Wide)

[Leon Fauster via devel]

Am 05.04.24 um 12:20 schrieb Vít Ondruch:


Dne 04. 04. 24 v 17:32 Kevin Kofler via devel napsal(a):

Neal Gompa wrote:

By default, GNOME only presents the close window button. The other
buttons are missing, and there isn't really an intuitive way to
discover the other window management actions.



I agree that there are no other buttons. But still, Gnome opens the 
windows in normalized state, not maximized what was the original claim.



It feels strange when a discussion is done about such things, to argue
against or for a component/DE/software etc.

As I said intuition is not something that is inherently in the 
technology. For instance, the "scale a photo"-gesture on a common

mobile device OS, is not "natural". Its something that was communicated
by advertisements.

Such communication could look like (with alternatives):
In Gnome, with the focus on a window, use the leftAlt+Space shortcut
to get your needed function. All that from the keyboard (intentional 
efficient short cut). And for the mouse pushers, open the tweak app to 
configure the top bar of the windows to get your button. For the distro, 
just configure for example the minimize button to be present as default.


All that said, does not solve the dialectic discussion. I would suggest
the equal authorization to be present for both desktop environments. And
such principle should lead the further activities. Remember diversity 
wins, ideology not.


--
Leon


--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Fedora Plasma Workstation (System-Wide)

[Peter Boy]

> Am 05.04.2024 um 14:16 schrieb Kevin Kofler via devel 
> :
> 
> Peter Boy wrote:
>>> 
>>> . . .
>> 
>> This is an absolute no-go! It would break everyone’s usage of Fedora
>> Workstation
> 
> It would be a major change, yes. Though not really different from the 
> aforementioned upgrade to GNOME 3 with its completely redesigned user 
> experience, which was also done.
> 
> If Workstation were never allowed to change its user experience, it would be 
> shipping MATE nowadays, not GNOME.

Well, a switch from Gnome to KDE would require a lot of changes in everyday 
applications, e.g. Mail. That is not required when you update from Gnome 2 to 
Gnome 3.


>> and is in irreconcilable contradiction to the characteristics of an
>> „Edition" as defined with Fedora.next.
> 
> How so?

Provide a reliable solution which includes a non breaking evolvement of the 
Edition.


But not to give the wrong impression: I think it would be beneficial for Fedora 
to develop an alternative to the current Gnome Workstation, which has evolved 
over the years into a rather fat, bloated and opaque entity. But I think this 
change proposal is the wrong way to go.


>> For the desktop area I don’t see a non-overlapping use case between Gnome
>> and KDE. It’s just a different tool for the same use case.
> 
> This exact argument was already used 10 years ago to reject our (that was 
> before I left the KDE SIG, though this issue was one of the triggers for me 
> leaving the SIG) request for a Plasma Edition. 10 years later, we still have 
> no way out of this dilemma. The definition of an Edition needs to be refined 
> or completely replaced to get out of this catch-22.
> 
> As part of the process to look for a non-overlapping use case, there was an 
> attempt to focus specifically on scientific applications, which eventually 
> lead to the Scientific Lab, but that did not make it to an Edition either, 
> just to a Lab.
> 
> The overlap issue is also going to hinder other deliverables' efforts to 
> become Editions. E.g., Silverblue mostly overlaps with Workstation and 
> CoreOS: Workstation for the general use cases (workstation/desktop usage), 
> CoreOS for the atomic and container-oriented use cases.

Too bad, an explicit scientific desktop edition might have helped me propagate 
a Linux desktop in our University research cluster of excellence a good decade 
ago.  Scientific Linux for Servers was a great success. 


But it could still be a non-overlapping use case in its own right (even if I am 
contradicting myself): 

Integration / integrability in professional work environments thanks to the 
similarity of the KDE interface to Windows / MacOS and thanks to the 
cross-operating system capabilities of KDE (many KDE apps are already available 
for Windows, at least I’m happily using Kate on MacOS). And additionally, a way 
aiming to specifically attract new users who are currently on Windows/MacOS.

Scientific Desktop would be a special sub-case of this.


(Hm, would be really attractive to develop something like that)




>> That may change and can change, of course. But that’s nothing for F42,
>> rather for F52.
> 
> It just requires creating a new working group. That can be done instantly.


I'm afraid it's not that simple. It requires not only a new foundation or 
restructuring of a SIG, but also a mindset change among participants.  And the 
latter takes much longer. 







--
Peter Boy
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Pboy
p...@fedoraproject.org

Timezone: CET (UTC+1) / CEST (UTC+2)

Fedora Server Edition Working Group member
Fedora Docs team contributor and board member
Java developer and enthusiast



--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Fedora Plasma Workstation (System-Wide)

[Leslie Satenstein via devel]

I am an old geezer with about 60 years of IT experience, from mainframe to 
cellphone.I am self-convinced that dropping gnome for KDE as a default would be 
BAD.Why?Today, everyone who ones a cellphone, has on his phone a set of icons. 
Some are there by default, some are there as extra applications that the user 
added.

The Cellphone user is very comfortable with Gnome. So much so, that I believe 
that if he was given KDE as the interface, two things would happen. a) The user 
will switch to Gnome, or b) The user will find a way to add his favourite 
applications to the desktop.
What then is a compromise that will satisfy the Gnome and KDE "bigots"?   
Consider:
The Fedora 41/42 installation program can ask the user if he prefers  "Menu" or 
"icon" interface.  
The above approach satisfied both camps.

Leslie Satenstein
 

On Friday, April 5, 2024 at 08:16:54 a.m. EDT, Kevin Kofler via devel 
 wrote:  
 
 Peter Boy wrote:
> I'm probably not the right person to comment on this, because I completely
> abandoned Fedora Desktop when it was hit (badly) by Gnome 3. That
> destroyed my daily workflow and work routines and made it unusable (for
> me), or at least barely usable for serious professional work not related
> to software development (and I ended up using MacOS to this day).

Which is exactly why I proposed back then to make Plasma (which actually 
operates more similarly to GNOME 2 than GNOME 3 does) the default. :-)

>> == Summary ==
>> Switch the default desktop experience for Workstation to KDE Plasma.
>> The GNOME desktop is moved to a separate spin / edition, retaining
>> release-blocking status.
> 
> This is an absolute no-go! It would break everyone’s usage of Fedora
> Workstation

It would be a major change, yes. Though not really different from the 
aforementioned upgrade to GNOME 3 with its completely redesigned user 
experience, which was also done.

If Workstation were never allowed to change its user experience, it would be 
shipping MATE nowadays, not GNOME.

> and is in irreconcilable contradiction to the characteristics of an
> „Edition" as defined with Fedora.next.

How so?

> And that is not „just“ a technical issue (the FESCo domain), but a basic
> Fedora principle.

If you believe a basic Fedora principle is being violated, please bring that 
up with the Council.

> Another proposal is to make it an „Edition“. But basically, a merely KDE
> Desktop is not „edition-able“. Among others, an edition is meant to cover
> a specific use case and a long-term and (more or less) perfectly designed
> and engineered solution for this. So we have desktop (Workstation) and
> server. Among server we have several Editions, the universal Fedora
> Server, container centric CoreOS, edge centric IoT and Cloud. Each of the
> server-like Editions covers a destined, specific use case without
> overlapping.
> 
> For the desktop area I don’t see a non-overlapping use case between Gnome
> and KDE. It’s just a different tool for the same use case.

This exact argument was already used 10 years ago to reject our (that was 
before I left the KDE SIG, though this issue was one of the triggers for me 
leaving the SIG) request for a Plasma Edition. 10 years later, we still have 
no way out of this dilemma. The definition of an Edition needs to be refined 
or completely replaced to get out of this catch-22.

As part of the process to look for a non-overlapping use case, there was an 
attempt to focus specifically on scientific applications, which eventually 
lead to the Scientific Lab, but that did not make it to an Edition either, 
just to a Lab.

The overlap issue is also going to hinder other deliverables' efforts to 
become Editions. E.g., Silverblue mostly overlaps with Workstation and 
CoreOS: Workstation for the general use cases (workstation/desktop usage), 
CoreOS for the atomic and container-oriented use cases.

> And if we are willing to accept an exception and accept KDE desktop as an
> Edition, I don’t see that the current SIG qualifies as an edition-capable
> working group. Given the recent discussion about Wayland / X11, I don’t
> see any obligation/commitment to ensure long-term reliability and
> trouble-free usability. Instead, I see in the discussion an unbridled
> desire to introduce something new (that's good) without regard for
> backwards compatibility and uninterrupted usability (that's bad, we need
> both). And obviously the resources to manage both (Wayland and X11) in one
> working group are also lacking (and given the schism, possibly also the
> willingness to do so).

That particular concern, however, is one that I also share. The working 
group should be required to accept at least one of us plasma-workspace-x11 
maintainers (it can be Sérgio M. Basto or Steven A. Falco if they do not 
accept me) into the working group.

> That may change and can change, of course. But that’s nothing for F42,
> rather for F52.

It just requires creating a new working group. That can be done 

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Fedora Plasma Workstation (System-Wide)

[Tomasz Torcz]

On Fri, Apr 05, 2024 at 12:20:51PM +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> 
> Dne 04. 04. 24 v 17:32 Kevin Kofler via devel napsal(a):
> > Neal Gompa wrote:
> > > By default, GNOME only presents the close window button. The other
> > > buttons are missing, and there isn't really an intuitive way to
> > > discover the other window management actions.
> 
> 
> I agree that there are no other buttons. But still, Gnome opens the windows
> in normalized state, not maximized what was the original claim.

  GNOME (Mutter) maximizes windows if they initially take 80% of more
screen space.

-- 
Tomasz   .. oo o.   oo o. .o   .o o. o. oo o.   ..
Torcz.. .o .o   .o .o oo   oo .o .. .. oo   oo
o.o.o.   .o .. o.   o. o. o.   o. o. oo .. ..   o.
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Fedora Plasma Workstation (System-Wide)

[Steve Cossette]

We didnt withdraw it because, well to be completely honest, we are afraid
that, if we do that, in the eyes of the community at least, we will abandon
the idea completely and any subsequent effort would be undermined as a
result.

It’s kindof a case of « damned if you do and damned if you don’t »…

On Fri, Apr 5, 2024 at 03:03 Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek 
wrote:

> On Thu, Apr 04, 2024 at 04:26:52PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > On Thu, 2024-04-04 at 18:35 -0400, Neal Gompa wrote:
> > > On Thu, Apr 4, 2024 at 6:17 PM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
> > >  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Apr 03, 2024 at 11:21:36AM -0500, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
> > > > > So here are three brainstorming proposals:
> > > > >
> > > > > (a) Fedora KDE Plasma Desktop becomes a Fedora edition. We'd need
> to be
> > > > > careful about how we do it. I would still promote Fedora
> Workstation as the
> > > > > main/recommended "leading" desktop, would call Plasma an
> "alternative
> > > > > desktop option," and would strongly caution against use of the word
> > > > > "Workstation" anywhere in the branding for the Plasma version.
> That is,
> > > > > let's continue to steer undecided users towards Fedora
> Workstation, while
> > > > > making Plasma easier to find and presenting it more prominently
> than it is
> > > > > today.
> > > >
> > > > I like this proposal. It would give the KDE spin more prominence and
> > > > would be a good reply to the huge work that has been put into the
> spin
> > > > in recent times. It also wouldn't disrupt our story about Fedora
> Workstation.
> > > >
> > > > If we call it "Fedora KDE Plasma Desktop" or similarly, it won't be
> > > > confused with Fedora Workstation.
> > > >
> > >
> > > So, effectively no change other than it moves from the Spins section
> > > to the Editions section? That would also mean it should be on the
> > > front page too, like the other Editions.
> >
> > Being an Edition is a very significant thing, though, as we conceive of
> > Fedora more widely than just the download page. We put a bunch of hoops
> > in the way of IoT and CoreOS becoming editions, and there are hoops in
> > the way of Silverblue becoming one (or, you know, wherever we go with
> > that path in the end).
>
> My silent assumption was that the current change proposal would be
> withdrawn and replaced by a new proposal. We have a formal procedure in
> [1].
> Looking at that list, it seems all fine. The only sticky point is whether
> KDE desktop serves a different purpose than Workstation with GNOME.
> I'd say it does: desktop preferences are like religion, and people don't
> just switch (except when they do).
>
> [1]
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/council/policy/edition-promotion-policy/
>
> Zbyszek
> --
> ___
> devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct:
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives:
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Do not reply to spam, report it:
> https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
>
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Fedora Plasma Workstation (System-Wide)

[Kevin Kofler via devel]

Peter Boy wrote:
> I'm probably not the right person to comment on this, because I completely
> abandoned Fedora Desktop when it was hit (badly) by Gnome 3. That
> destroyed my daily workflow and work routines and made it unusable (for
> me), or at least barely usable for serious professional work not related
> to software development (and I ended up using MacOS to this day).

Which is exactly why I proposed back then to make Plasma (which actually 
operates more similarly to GNOME 2 than GNOME 3 does) the default. :-)

>> == Summary ==
>> Switch the default desktop experience for Workstation to KDE Plasma.
>> The GNOME desktop is moved to a separate spin / edition, retaining
>> release-blocking status.
> 
> This is an absolute no-go! It would break everyone’s usage of Fedora
> Workstation

It would be a major change, yes. Though not really different from the 
aforementioned upgrade to GNOME 3 with its completely redesigned user 
experience, which was also done.

If Workstation were never allowed to change its user experience, it would be 
shipping MATE nowadays, not GNOME.

> and is in irreconcilable contradiction to the characteristics of an
> „Edition" as defined with Fedora.next.

How so?

> And that is not „just“ a technical issue (the FESCo domain), but a basic
> Fedora principle.

If you believe a basic Fedora principle is being violated, please bring that 
up with the Council.

> Another proposal is to make it an „Edition“. But basically, a merely KDE
> Desktop is not „edition-able“. Among others, an edition is meant to cover
> a specific use case and a long-term and (more or less) perfectly designed
> and engineered solution for this. So we have desktop (Workstation) and
> server. Among server we have several Editions, the universal Fedora
> Server, container centric CoreOS, edge centric IoT and Cloud. Each of the
> server-like Editions covers a destined, specific use case without
> overlapping.
> 
> For the desktop area I don’t see a non-overlapping use case between Gnome
> and KDE. It’s just a different tool for the same use case.

This exact argument was already used 10 years ago to reject our (that was 
before I left the KDE SIG, though this issue was one of the triggers for me 
leaving the SIG) request for a Plasma Edition. 10 years later, we still have 
no way out of this dilemma. The definition of an Edition needs to be refined 
or completely replaced to get out of this catch-22.

As part of the process to look for a non-overlapping use case, there was an 
attempt to focus specifically on scientific applications, which eventually 
lead to the Scientific Lab, but that did not make it to an Edition either, 
just to a Lab.

The overlap issue is also going to hinder other deliverables' efforts to 
become Editions. E.g., Silverblue mostly overlaps with Workstation and 
CoreOS: Workstation for the general use cases (workstation/desktop usage), 
CoreOS for the atomic and container-oriented use cases.

> And if we are willing to accept an exception and accept KDE desktop as an
> Edition, I don’t see that the current SIG qualifies as an edition-capable
> working group. Given the recent discussion about Wayland / X11, I don’t
> see any obligation/commitment to ensure long-term reliability and
> trouble-free usability. Instead, I see in the discussion an unbridled
> desire to introduce something new (that's good) without regard for
> backwards compatibility and uninterrupted usability (that's bad, we need
> both). And obviously the resources to manage both (Wayland and X11) in one
> working group are also lacking (and given the schism, possibly also the
> willingness to do so).

That particular concern, however, is one that I also share. The working 
group should be required to accept at least one of us plasma-workspace-x11 
maintainers (it can be Sérgio M. Basto or Steven A. Falco if they do not 
accept me) into the working group.

> That may change and can change, of course. But that’s nothing for F42,
> rather for F52.

It just requires creating a new working group. That can be done instantly.

> This is a failure to understand (or to commit to) what we have decided to
> do with Fedora.next. We don't want to DIY piece together a solution.

But one of the big strengths of Fedora is that you can do exactly that.

> And it is a plain false promise. You can't install CoreOS, IoT, silverblue
> with it, not even Server, which is offered in the menu (because a lot of
> presets are missing).

The presets thing is something that should be fixed. Maybe an entry "server 
presets" in the list of checkboxes that will install a metapackage that then 
uses boolean Requires to drag in the individual preset packages for whatever 
the user actually installs during or after the installation.

The inability to install an atomic system using Everything is inherent to 
what atomic systems are and what the Everything ISO is, and should be 
obvious to anyone who actually understands what they want to install.

> 

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Fedora Plasma Workstation (System-Wide)

[Peter Boy]

I'm probably not the right person to comment on this, because I completely 
abandoned Fedora Desktop when it was hit (badly) by Gnome 3. That destroyed my 
daily workflow and work routines and made it unusable (for me), or at least 
barely usable for serious professional work not related to software development 
(and I ended up using MacOS to this day). 

But I have continued to use Fedora Server on all of our servers, have committed 
to the working group, and still consider Fedora a great distribution, 
regardless. 


So, nevertheless: 

> == Summary ==
> Switch the default desktop experience for Workstation to KDE Plasma.
> The GNOME desktop is moved to a separate spin / edition, retaining
> release-blocking status.


This is an absolute no-go! It would break everyone’s usage of Fedora 
Workstation and is in irreconcilable contradiction to the characteristics of an 
„Edition" as defined with Fedora.next. 

And that is not „just“ a technical issue (the FESCo domain), but a basic Fedora 
principle. 


Another proposal is to make it an „Edition“. But basically, a merely KDE 
Desktop is not „edition-able“. Among others, an edition is meant to cover a 
specific use case and a long-term and (more or less) perfectly designed and 
engineered solution for this. So we have desktop (Workstation) and server. 
Among server we have several Editions, the universal Fedora Server, container 
centric CoreOS, edge centric IoT and Cloud. Each of the server-like Editions 
covers a destined, specific use case without overlapping. 

For the desktop area I don’t see a non-overlapping use case between Gnome and 
KDE. It’s just a different tool for the same use case. 

And if we are willing to accept an exception and accept KDE desktop as an 
Edition, I don’t see that the current SIG qualifies as an edition-capable 
working group. Given the recent discussion about Wayland / X11, I don’t see any 
obligation/commitment to ensure long-term reliability and trouble-free 
usability. Instead, I see in the discussion an unbridled desire to introduce 
something new (that's good) without regard for backwards compatibility and 
uninterrupted usability (that's bad, we need both). And obviously the resources 
to manage both (Wayland and X11) in one working group are also lacking (and 
given the schism, possibly also the willingness to do so).  

That may change and can change, of course. But that’s nothing for F42, rather 
for F52.


> There are only two artifacts left on alt.fedoraproject.org that really
> need to be moved to the main site:
> 
> - the Everything netinstall ISO

This is a failure to understand (or to commit to) what we have decided to do 
with Fedora.next. We don't want to DIY piece together a solution.  

And it is a plain false promise. You can't install CoreOS, IoT, silverblue with 
it, not even Server, which is offered in the menu (because a lot of presets are 
missing). 

We should discard it from the website at all, or at least rename it to „All 
desktop offerings for DIY on your own risk“. And it really belongs to 
alt.fedoraproject.org  and under no 
circumstances on the main page, and certainly not on the editions. 



> Am 05.04.2024 um 00:17 schrieb Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek 
> :
> 
> ... 
> I’m not sure. I think the getfedora.o page could use some work, but
> just moving one or two things might not be enough. For me, when using
> the website is the huge list semi-orthogonal categories:
> the top-level split is:
>  - editions, as individual items
>  - atomic desktops
>  - spins
>  - labs
>  - alt downloads
> Alt downloads is split into:
>  - Fedora 40 beta
>  - network installer
>  - torrent downloads
>  - alternate architectures (even though download pages also have 
> architectures?)
>  - cloud base images
>  - testing images
>  - rawhide

This is really intentional. It is what we decided with Fedora.next and that 
resulted in a great success for Fedora. So we should really leave the structure 
as it is. 

> ...  
> And there are at least three domains:
> getfedora.org, fedoraproject.org, alt.fedoraproject.org.
> ... 
> This is hard to navigate. It seems that each subpage uses a different
> categorization and way to split things. And the different subpages
> use different visual styles.
> 
> I think we should have:
>  a) one domain

Basically, we have one domain *now*: fedoraproject.org 

getfedora.org is a backwards compatible forwarding of the old way of presenting 
fedora.

alt.fedoraproject.org is a subdomain, which is a widespread way to structure a 
huge and complex offering as Fedora. Similarly, we have e.g. 
calendar.fedoraproject.org or lists.fedoraproject.org  


>  b) a flat categorization where you first select the type
>  (one of the editions or the desktops or spins or labs or network
>  installer or cloud image).
> 
>  The editions should be listed prominently, and the other things can
>  lower in the page or require a click to show.

From a UX perspective, this is 

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Fedora Plasma Workstation (System-Wide)

[Neal Gompa]

On Fri, Apr 5, 2024 at 3:03 AM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
 wrote:
>
> On Thu, Apr 04, 2024 at 04:26:52PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > On Thu, 2024-04-04 at 18:35 -0400, Neal Gompa wrote:
> > > On Thu, Apr 4, 2024 at 6:17 PM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
> > >  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Apr 03, 2024 at 11:21:36AM -0500, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
> > > > > So here are three brainstorming proposals:
> > > > >
> > > > > (a) Fedora KDE Plasma Desktop becomes a Fedora edition. We'd need to 
> > > > > be
> > > > > careful about how we do it. I would still promote Fedora Workstation 
> > > > > as the
> > > > > main/recommended "leading" desktop, would call Plasma an "alternative
> > > > > desktop option," and would strongly caution against use of the word
> > > > > "Workstation" anywhere in the branding for the Plasma version. That 
> > > > > is,
> > > > > let's continue to steer undecided users towards Fedora Workstation, 
> > > > > while
> > > > > making Plasma easier to find and presenting it more prominently than 
> > > > > it is
> > > > > today.
> > > >
> > > > I like this proposal. It would give the KDE spin more prominence and
> > > > would be a good reply to the huge work that has been put into the spin
> > > > in recent times. It also wouldn't disrupt our story about Fedora 
> > > > Workstation.
> > > >
> > > > If we call it "Fedora KDE Plasma Desktop" or similarly, it won't be
> > > > confused with Fedora Workstation.
> > > >
> > >
> > > So, effectively no change other than it moves from the Spins section
> > > to the Editions section? That would also mean it should be on the
> > > front page too, like the other Editions.
> >
> > Being an Edition is a very significant thing, though, as we conceive of
> > Fedora more widely than just the download page. We put a bunch of hoops
> > in the way of IoT and CoreOS becoming editions, and there are hoops in
> > the way of Silverblue becoming one (or, you know, wherever we go with
> > that path in the end).
>
> My silent assumption was that the current change proposal would be
> withdrawn and replaced by a new proposal. We have a formal procedure in [1].
> Looking at that list, it seems all fine. The only sticky point is whether
> KDE desktop serves a different purpose than Workstation with GNOME.
> I'd say it does: desktop preferences are like religion, and people don't
> just switch (except when they do).
>
> [1] 
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/council/policy/edition-promotion-policy/
>

I have asked that the proposal only be withdrawn once an alternative
arrangement has been successfully made[1]. I don't expect it to be
withdrawn until that is figured out, since Matthew Miller didn't
promise anything to resolve the underlying request to make Fedora KDE
Plasma Desktop as visible as Fedora GNOME Workstation[2].

[1]: https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/111343/44
[2]: https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/111343/41



-- 
真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Fedora Plasma Workstation (System-Wide)

[Vít Ondruch]

Dne 04. 04. 24 v 17:32 Kevin Kofler via devel napsal(a):

Neal Gompa wrote:

By default, GNOME only presents the close window button. The other
buttons are missing, and there isn't really an intuitive way to
discover the other window management actions.



I agree that there are no other buttons. But still, Gnome opens the 
windows in normalized state, not maximized what was the original claim.




In the version I tried, and judging from end user reports, for several
years, it did not even present that, leading to fun issues such as some KDE
dialogs that could not be closed at all (because they were missing a "Close"
button and relying on the window decoration exclusively).



I have never seen Gnome / Gtk app without "Close" button. I can imagine 
that there likely can be issue for some non-Gtk app. I don't know.


In any case, I prefer to use Gtk apps for Gnome and I assume this is the 
case for Gnome users. Similarly I won't be surprised if KDE users prefer 
QT apps. Mixing the DE and frameworks might not always work without 
issues. And this is not just about Gtk / Qt and Gnome / KDE. E.g. Java 
apps might look out of place on both DEs.



Vít




OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Fedora Plasma Workstation (System-Wide)

[Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek]

On Thu, Apr 04, 2024 at 04:26:52PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Thu, 2024-04-04 at 18:35 -0400, Neal Gompa wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 4, 2024 at 6:17 PM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
> >  wrote:
> > > 
> > > On Wed, Apr 03, 2024 at 11:21:36AM -0500, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
> > > > So here are three brainstorming proposals:
> > > > 
> > > > (a) Fedora KDE Plasma Desktop becomes a Fedora edition. We'd need to be
> > > > careful about how we do it. I would still promote Fedora Workstation as 
> > > > the
> > > > main/recommended "leading" desktop, would call Plasma an "alternative
> > > > desktop option," and would strongly caution against use of the word
> > > > "Workstation" anywhere in the branding for the Plasma version. That is,
> > > > let's continue to steer undecided users towards Fedora Workstation, 
> > > > while
> > > > making Plasma easier to find and presenting it more prominently than it 
> > > > is
> > > > today.
> > > 
> > > I like this proposal. It would give the KDE spin more prominence and
> > > would be a good reply to the huge work that has been put into the spin
> > > in recent times. It also wouldn't disrupt our story about Fedora 
> > > Workstation.
> > > 
> > > If we call it "Fedora KDE Plasma Desktop" or similarly, it won't be
> > > confused with Fedora Workstation.
> > > 
> > 
> > So, effectively no change other than it moves from the Spins section
> > to the Editions section? That would also mean it should be on the
> > front page too, like the other Editions.
> 
> Being an Edition is a very significant thing, though, as we conceive of
> Fedora more widely than just the download page. We put a bunch of hoops
> in the way of IoT and CoreOS becoming editions, and there are hoops in
> the way of Silverblue becoming one (or, you know, wherever we go with
> that path in the end).

My silent assumption was that the current change proposal would be
withdrawn and replaced by a new proposal. We have a formal procedure in [1].
Looking at that list, it seems all fine. The only sticky point is whether
KDE desktop serves a different purpose than Workstation with GNOME.
I'd say it does: desktop preferences are like religion, and people don't
just switch (except when they do).

[1] 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/council/policy/edition-promotion-policy/

Zbyszek
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Fedora Plasma Workstation (System-Wide)

[Adam Williamson]

On Thu, 2024-04-04 at 18:35 -0400, Neal Gompa wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 4, 2024 at 6:17 PM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
>  wrote:
> > 
> > On Wed, Apr 03, 2024 at 11:21:36AM -0500, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
> > > So here are three brainstorming proposals:
> > > 
> > > (a) Fedora KDE Plasma Desktop becomes a Fedora edition. We'd need to be
> > > careful about how we do it. I would still promote Fedora Workstation as 
> > > the
> > > main/recommended "leading" desktop, would call Plasma an "alternative
> > > desktop option," and would strongly caution against use of the word
> > > "Workstation" anywhere in the branding for the Plasma version. That is,
> > > let's continue to steer undecided users towards Fedora Workstation, while
> > > making Plasma easier to find and presenting it more prominently than it is
> > > today.
> > 
> > I like this proposal. It would give the KDE spin more prominence and
> > would be a good reply to the huge work that has been put into the spin
> > in recent times. It also wouldn't disrupt our story about Fedora 
> > Workstation.
> > 
> > If we call it "Fedora KDE Plasma Desktop" or similarly, it won't be
> > confused with Fedora Workstation.
> > 
> 
> So, effectively no change other than it moves from the Spins section
> to the Editions section? That would also mean it should be on the
> front page too, like the other Editions.

Being an Edition is a very significant thing, though, as we conceive of
Fedora more widely than just the download page. We put a bunch of hoops
in the way of IoT and CoreOS becoming editions, and there are hoops in
the way of Silverblue becoming one (or, you know, wherever we go with
that path in the end).
-- 
Adam Williamson (he/him/his)
Fedora QA
Fedora Chat: @adamwill:fedora.im | Mastodon: @ad...@fosstodon.org
https://www.happyassassin.net



--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Fedora Plasma Workstation (System-Wide)

[Neal Gompa]

On Thu, Apr 4, 2024 at 6:17 PM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
 wrote:
>
> On Wed, Apr 03, 2024 at 11:21:36AM -0500, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
> > So here are three brainstorming proposals:
> >
> > (a) Fedora KDE Plasma Desktop becomes a Fedora edition. We'd need to be
> > careful about how we do it. I would still promote Fedora Workstation as the
> > main/recommended "leading" desktop, would call Plasma an "alternative
> > desktop option," and would strongly caution against use of the word
> > "Workstation" anywhere in the branding for the Plasma version. That is,
> > let's continue to steer undecided users towards Fedora Workstation, while
> > making Plasma easier to find and presenting it more prominently than it is
> > today.
>
> I like this proposal. It would give the KDE spin more prominence and
> would be a good reply to the huge work that has been put into the spin
> in recent times. It also wouldn't disrupt our story about Fedora Workstation.
>
> If we call it "Fedora KDE Plasma Desktop" or similarly, it won't be
> confused with Fedora Workstation.
>

So, effectively no change other than it moves from the Spins section
to the Editions section? That would also mean it should be on the
front page too, like the other Editions.

> > (b) Alternatively, elevate the positioning of all spins on the
> > fedoraproject.org homepage. Place the link to the spins right next to the
> > link to Fedora Workstation, above the atomic desktops (which are sadly still
> > experimental), above the Fedora labs and ALT downloads, and honestly
> > probably above the non-desktop Fedora editions. Nobody is going to be
> > confused as to which one is the primary product.
>
> I'm not sure. I think the getfedora.o page could use some work, but
> just moving one or two things might not be enough. For me, when using
> the website is the huge list semi-orthogonal categories:
> the top-level split is:
>   - editions, as individual items
>   - atomic desktops
>   - spins
>   - labs
>   - alt downloads
> Alt downloads is split into:
>   - Fedora 40 beta
>   - network installer
>   - torrent downloads
>   - alternate architectures (even though download pages also have 
> architectures?)
>   - cloud base images
>   - testing images
>   - rawhide
> The Fedora Spins looks great, IMO.
> The Fedora Labs page looks nice too.
>
> There's also a visual split
> I also always struggle to find Beta releases when I need them.
> In some places there's a banner with a link, in other places there's a toogle.
>
> And there are at least three domains:
> getfedora.org, fedoraproject.org, alt.fedoraproject.org.
>
> This is hard to navigate. It seems that each subpage uses a different
> categorization and way to split things. And the different subpages
> use different visual styles.
>
> I think we should have:
>   a) one domain
>
>   b) a flat categorization where you first select the type
>   (one of the editions or the desktops or spins or labs or network
>   installer or cloud image).
>
>   The editions should be listed prominently, and the other things can
>   lower in the page or require a click to show.
>
>   c) at all subpages there should be a toggle button to show
>   pre-release
>
>   d) once you know what to download, you can see
>   the architecture and format options and torrent vs. iso.
>
> In such a structure the same "procedure" would be used to navigate
> different choices, making it easier to figure out what all the options
> are.
>

There are only two artifacts left on alt.fedoraproject.org that really
need to be moved to the main site:

- the Everything netinstall ISO
- the Fedora base container images

We should maybe consider adding the torrent downloads to the main site, I guess?

The alternative architecture images page needs to be decommissioned,
as it's redundant with the content on the main site. The rest of
alt.fedoraproject.org is probably fine as it is, as I doubt we want to
put Rawhide somewhere on the main site.

(Also, as an aside, I learned that Workstation has a ppc64le ISO, I
guess we should ensure KDE has one too, it's not like we don't have it
for Kinoite already.)






--
真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Fedora Plasma Workstation (System-Wide)

[Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek]

On Wed, Apr 03, 2024 at 11:21:36AM -0500, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
> So here are three brainstorming proposals:
> 
> (a) Fedora KDE Plasma Desktop becomes a Fedora edition. We'd need to be
> careful about how we do it. I would still promote Fedora Workstation as the
> main/recommended "leading" desktop, would call Plasma an "alternative
> desktop option," and would strongly caution against use of the word
> "Workstation" anywhere in the branding for the Plasma version. That is,
> let's continue to steer undecided users towards Fedora Workstation, while
> making Plasma easier to find and presenting it more prominently than it is
> today.

I like this proposal. It would give the KDE spin more prominence and
would be a good reply to the huge work that has been put into the spin
in recent times. It also wouldn't disrupt our story about Fedora Workstation.

If we call it "Fedora KDE Plasma Desktop" or similarly, it won't be
confused with Fedora Workstation.

> (b) Alternatively, elevate the positioning of all spins on the
> fedoraproject.org homepage. Place the link to the spins right next to the
> link to Fedora Workstation, above the atomic desktops (which are sadly still
> experimental), above the Fedora labs and ALT downloads, and honestly
> probably above the non-desktop Fedora editions. Nobody is going to be
> confused as to which one is the primary product.

I'm not sure. I think the getfedora.o page could use some work, but
just moving one or two things might not be enough. For me, when using
the website is the huge list semi-orthogonal categories:
the top-level split is:
  - editions, as individual items
  - atomic desktops
  - spins
  - labs
  - alt downloads
Alt downloads is split into:
  - Fedora 40 beta
  - network installer
  - torrent downloads
  - alternate architectures (even though download pages also have 
architectures?)
  - cloud base images
  - testing images
  - rawhide
The Fedora Spins looks great, IMO.
The Fedora Labs page looks nice too.

There's also a visual split 
I also always struggle to find Beta releases when I need them.
In some places there's a banner with a link, in other places there's a toogle.

And there are at least three domains:
getfedora.org, fedoraproject.org, alt.fedoraproject.org.

This is hard to navigate. It seems that each subpage uses a different
categorization and way to split things. And the different subpages
use different visual styles.

I think we should have:
  a) one domain

  b) a flat categorization where you first select the type
  (one of the editions or the desktops or spins or labs or network
  installer or cloud image).

  The editions should be listed prominently, and the other things can
  lower in the page or require a click to show.

  c) at all subpages there should be a toggle button to show
  pre-release

  d) once you know what to download, you can see
  the architecture and format options and torrent vs. iso.

In such a structure the same "procedure" would be used to navigate
different choices, making it easier to figure out what all the options
are.
  
Zbyszek
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Fedora Plasma Workstation (System-Wide)

[Aaron Rainbolt]

On 4/4/24 15:36, Przemek Klosowski via devel wrote:

On 4/3/24 17:49, Kevin Kofler via devel wrote:


And is there a statistical evaluation of that data somewhere? Downloading
350 MiB (!) of raw CSV data does not sound to me like a convenient way to
work with it.


It's messy, but interesting. Here's the architecture data for the last 
3 or so years:


from top to bottom, x86_64 aarch64 ppc64le s390x armhfp i386 arm 
powerpc64 riscv64


so you can see the decline of armhfp and i386.

I don't know what to make of the relatively large population of 
ppc64le and s390x; I think maybe IBM is eating their own dogfood and 
using it in some internal datacenters?


I am pleased to see RISC-V showing up within last year!

Very impressive. I tried to make a table of output using a Python script 
and it ended up being so inefficient for reasons I don't understand (a 
bug in my code possibly/likely) that I couldn't get the final report to 
ever come out.


sqlite -csv :memory:

.import totals.csv t

select date(round(julianday(week_end)/30)*30) as Tx, count(os_arch) 
filter (where os_arch like "x86_64") as x86_64, count(os_arch) filter 
(where os_arch like "aarch64") as aarch64,  count(os_arch) filter 
(where os_arch like "ppc64le") as ppc64le, count(os_arch) filter 
(where os_arch like "s390x") as s390x,  count(os_arch) filter (where 
os_arch like "armhfp") as armhfp, count(os_arch) filter (where os_arch 
like "i386") as i386,count(os_arch) filter (where os_arch like "arm") 
as arm, count(os_arch) filter (where os_arch like "powerpc64") as 
powerpc64, count(os_arch) filter (where os_arch like "riscv64") as 
riscv64 from t group by tx





--
___
devel mailing list --devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email todevel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of 
Conduct:https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines:https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List 
Archives:https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report 
it:https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue


--
Aaron Rainbolt
Lubuntu Developer
Matrix: @arraybolt3:ubuntu.com
IRC: arraybolt3 on libera.chat and oftc.net
GitHub:https://github.com/ArrayBolt3
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Fedora Plasma Workstation (System-Wide)

[Stephen Smoogen]

On Thu, 4 Apr 2024 at 16:37, Przemek Klosowski via devel <
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org> wrote:

> On 4/3/24 17:49, Kevin Kofler via devel wrote:
>
>
>
Thanks for doing this. I would have loved to find a way to just have
gnuplot do this nightly


> And is there a statistical evaluation of that data somewhere? Downloading
> 350 MiB (!) of raw CSV data does not sound to me like a convenient way to
> work with it.
>
> It's messy, but interesting. Here's the architecture data for the last 3
> or so years:
>

I found using a 4 day moving average cleaned up a lot of issues ranging
from Fedora proxy logs not being gotten due to script issues or similar. It
also evened out the Friday night to Monday morning drop on all items we
have seen in the older yum data also.


> from top to bottom, x86_64 aarch64 ppc64le s390x armhfp i386 arm powerpc64
> riscv64
>
> so you can see the decline of armhfp and i386.
>
> I don't know what to make of the relatively large population of ppc64le
> and s390x; I think maybe IBM is eating their own dogfood and using it in
> some internal datacenters?
>

When I looked at it several years ago it was being used all over from the
IP space. Some of it was IBM, some of it was IBM cloud and some of it was
various universities and stuff.



> I am pleased to see RISC-V showing up within last year!
>
>
> sqlite -csv :memory:
>
> .import totals.csv t
>
> select date(round(julianday(week_end)/30)*30) as Tx, count(os_arch) filter
> (where os_arch like "x86_64") as x86_64, count(os_arch) filter (where
> os_arch like "aarch64") as aarch64,  count(os_arch) filter (where os_arch
> like "ppc64le") as ppc64le, count(os_arch) filter (where os_arch like
> "s390x") as s390x,  count(os_arch) filter (where os_arch like "armhfp") as
> armhfp, count(os_arch) filter (where os_arch like "i386") as
> i386,count(os_arch) filter (where os_arch like "arm") as arm,
> count(os_arch) filter (where os_arch like "powerpc64") as powerpc64,
> count(os_arch) filter (where os_arch like "riscv64") as riscv64 from t
> group by tx
>
>
>
>

-- 
Stephen Smoogen, Red Hat Automotive
Let us be kind to one another, for most of us are fighting a hard battle.
-- Ian MacClaren
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Fedora Plasma Workstation (System-Wide)

[Przemek Klosowski via devel]

On 4/3/24 17:49, Kevin Kofler via devel wrote:


And is there a statistical evaluation of that data somewhere? Downloading
350 MiB (!) of raw CSV data does not sound to me like a convenient way to
work with it.


It's messy, but interesting. Here's the architecture data for the last 3 
or so years:


from top to bottom, x86_64 aarch64 ppc64le s390x armhfp i386 arm 
powerpc64 riscv64


so you can see the decline of armhfp and i386.

I don't know what to make of the relatively large population of ppc64le 
and s390x; I think maybe IBM is eating their own dogfood and using it in 
some internal datacenters?


I am pleased to see RISC-V showing up within last year!


sqlite -csv :memory:

.import totals.csv t

select date(round(julianday(week_end)/30)*30) as Tx, count(os_arch) 
filter (where os_arch like "x86_64") as x86_64, count(os_arch) filter 
(where os_arch like "aarch64") as aarch64, count(os_arch) filter (where 
os_arch like "ppc64le") as ppc64le, count(os_arch) filter (where os_arch 
like "s390x") as s390x, count(os_arch) filter (where os_arch like 
"armhfp") as armhfp, count(os_arch) filter (where os_arch like "i386") 
as i386,count(os_arch) filter (where os_arch like "arm") as arm, 
count(os_arch) filter (where os_arch like "powerpc64") as powerpc64, 
count(os_arch) filter (where os_arch like "riscv64") as riscv64 from t 
group by tx



--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Fedora Plasma Workstation (System-Wide)

[Andreas Tunek]

Den ons 3 apr. 2024 kl 23:27 skrev Kevin Kofler via devel <
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org>:

> Andreas Tunek wrote:
> > From Red Hat's POV it is not Fedora Gnome Workstation (
> >
> https://blogs.gnome.org/uraeus/2020/05/07/gnome-is-not-the-default-for-fedora-workstation/
> > ).
>
> TL;DR: "We do not want 'GNOME' in the name because we want to only support
> GNOME in Workstation, whereas 'GNOME Workstation' would imply that there
> are
> other Workstations."
>
> I am not sure I buy this argument. By the same argument, we should also
> not
> call the OS "Fedora Linux" because it implies there is also a "Fedora BSD"
> or "Fedora Hurd" or even "Fedora Windows" ;-) or something.
>
>
Yes, Fedora used to have a correct name, but it was changed.


> Giving a product a clear name does not imply existence of another product.
>
> (And that is not even arguing the premise of the "one single Workstation
> that happens to use GNOME" concept, only the branding implications!)
>
> > One of the best things with Fedora Workstation is that it is a complete
> > user facing OS (like Windows, macOS and iOS) that you actually can
> develop
> > applications for (if you want to). You don't have to target the extremely
> > fluffy "Linux desktop", you can target Fedora Workstation. This proposal
> > would totally eliminate the good points of having this single OS and app
> > platform.
>
> That "conveniently" ignores the existence of that pesky thing called
> "other
> distributions". The GNU/Linux version of vendor lock-in. Thanks Red Hat!
>
> And besides, a standalone application (as opposed to a desktop widget or
> similar) developed for one of the Fedora desktop deliverables (Workstation
> Edition, desktop Spins) is also going to work on any of the others.
>

>From the user facing app side, if you want to implement support for your
company's weird week numbering system in the calendar widget in Fedora
Workstation you can do that today. If there were two desktop systems it
would be more than twice the work (since you need two distinct dev
environments).

>From the infrastructure side it is even worse. Red Hat has been very
successful using Fedora as the first implementation from things like
systemd to PipeWire zero copy screen sharing. I believe that has been aided
by the fact that it is possible to do one implementation instead of
several. When you see that things work you can make everything "API
stable"*  and usable by other systems. If you have several desktop systems
they will have diverging feature set (as Schaller wrote in his blog post)
or development will slow down quite a lot.

You might call this "vendor lock in", but from my perspective things like
systemd and PipeWire have been very successful projects that have gotten
support from a majority of the free software eco-system. And I think they
have been aided by the focus on Fedora and the fact that Fedora Workstation
is ONE platform.

/Andreas

*Or how things are suppose to work together, it is hard to find the right
words.


>
> Kevin Kofler
> --
> ___
> devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct:
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives:
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Do not reply to spam, report it:
> https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
>
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Fedora Plasma Workstation (System-Wide)

[Naheem Zaffar]

On Thu, 4 Apr 2024, 16:35 Kevin Kofler via devel, <
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org> wrote:

> Neal Gompa wrote:
> > By default, GNOME only presents the close window button. The other
> > buttons are missing, and there isn't really an intuitive way to
> > discover the other window management actions.
>
> In the version I tried, and judging from end user reports, for several
> years, it did not even present that, leading to fun issues such as some
> KDE
> dialogs that could not be closed at all (because they were missing a
> "Close"
> button and relying on the window decoration exclusively).
>
> >> "the shut down options in the mouse menu hidden behind a keyboard dead
> >> key, etc.)" this is also not the case for ages, or at least not in its
> >> completeness.
> >
> > Yes, this did change a few GNOME releases ago.
>
> Of course, having only tried GNOME 3 once, I could not know this.
>

Of course the right thing to do when faced with a topic where you lack
knowledge is to not throw shade and either learn it first or decide others
know better and not comment.

What has been really awkward about this proposal is that instead of
focussing on the benefits of Plasma, it's used as more of an axe to grind
about gnome. Not unexpected considering the lead proposer.

However that is not helpful.

If you need to define gnome in order to promote plasma, you are doing it
wrong.

>
> Kevin Kofler
> --
> ___
> devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct:
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives:
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Do not reply to spam, report it:
> https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
>
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Fedora Plasma Workstation (System-Wide)

[Kevin Kofler via devel]

Neal Gompa wrote:
> By default, GNOME only presents the close window button. The other
> buttons are missing, and there isn't really an intuitive way to
> discover the other window management actions.

In the version I tried, and judging from end user reports, for several 
years, it did not even present that, leading to fun issues such as some KDE 
dialogs that could not be closed at all (because they were missing a "Close" 
button and relying on the window decoration exclusively).

>> "the shut down options in the mouse menu hidden behind a keyboard dead
>> key, etc.)" this is also not the case for ages, or at least not in its
>> completeness.
> 
> Yes, this did change a few GNOME releases ago.

Of course, having only tried GNOME 3 once, I could not know this.

Kevin Kofler
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Fedora Plasma Workstation (System-Wide)

[Kevin Kofler via devel]

Leon Fauster via devel wrote:
> 10 minutes is not enough to do a remodeling of the "familiar"
> experience, so that you reaches the so called realm of intuition.
> The latter is something that we learn over time and the desktop
> environment does not offer this on its own. It provides only a
> framework where this can happen.

But that is exactly the issue with the GNOME design: It is really arrogant 
to expect me to unlearn decades of learned familiar experience and retrain 
to something completely different that in the end has at most minor 
advantages, it is not significantly better, just different.

I want the software to ideally behave the way I am used to (i.e., the way 
Windows 95 worked, see below) out of the box, or if not, at least have an 
"old-school mode" toggle in the preferences that makes it work that way (and 
I will almost certainly use that toggle).

> PS: Imagine the first CLI steps and the corresponding bad
> experience, but we have not given up :-)!

Oh, my first computer was actually an XT clone running IBM PC-DOS 3.3. So I 
actually started with a CLI. :-) Then Windows 95 on a Pentium 120 (MHz). And 
on that Pentium, I also got started with versions of Red Hat Linux of the 
time (not sure what the first one was), first from CD-ROMs bundled with 
computer magazines, then the downloadable FTP edition. And I also tried one 
magazine CD-ROM with an edition of Caldera "OpenLinux" (which was actually 
much less open than RHL, and Caldera eventually became the infamous SCO) 
with the at the time brand new KDE 1 (version 1.1.1). Having used DOS, the 
bash CLI was not that bad to work with, but the distros at the time already 
came with GUI environments (FVWM95, then came KDE 1 and GNOME 1).

Kevin Kofler
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Fedora Plasma Workstation (System-Wide)

[Kevin Kofler via devel]

Kilian Hanich via devel wrote:
> About the release cycle: After the initial release of Plasma 6 when dust
> has mostly settled down (approx. 2 point releases), they want to switch
> over to a release cycle which would align (which is likely also the
> reason why F42 was choosen in this proposal).

Interesting point. And there I thought it was only because the answer is 
always 42. ;-)

Kevin Kofler
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Fedora Plasma Workstation (System-Wide)

[Kevin Kofler via devel]

Gordon Messmer wrote:
> If RPM's ELF dependency generator were better, the importance of
> stability would be debatable, but as it is, I really think Fedora should
> be more stable than it is, especially for whatever it defines as "the
> OS."  Today, dnf/rpm will happily allow users to install an application
> that will not run because that application actually depends on newer
> versions of dependencies than are installed on the system.  If a
> significant portion of the standard desktop regularly rebased in the
> middle of a release, I expect that would be a more common problem.

Symbol versioning helps with this, because the ELF dependency generator 
extracts the symbol versions (though not the individual symbols, only the 
versions) that are required. And, e.g., Qt uses symbol versioning.

The KDE packages also often have explicit versioned Requires on the 
dependencies where it matters.

Kevin Kofler
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Fedora Plasma Workstation (System-Wide)

[Kevin Kofler via devel]

Gordon Messmer wrote:
> "When you are using the Linux mark pursuant to a sublicense, it should
> never be used as a verb or noun. It should be used only as an adjective
> followed by the generic name/noun. In other words, “Super Dooper Linux
> OS” is okay, but “Super Dooper Linux” isn’t."
> 
> https://www.linuxfoundation.org/legal/the-linux-mark

Kinda the same recommendation that also applies to the Fedora trademark, by 
the way. But everyone only cares about their own trademark.

Kevin Kofler
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Fedora Plasma Workstation (System-Wide)

[Steve Cossette]

With that being said though, I would rather this discussion not to devolve
into a "Which DE is better".

I've said that in the past, but each Desktop Environment has their merits,
and discussing "Which is better" is as fruitless as "Mac vs PC" or "Android
vs iOS" fights.

On Thu, Apr 4, 2024 at 8:34 AM Steve Cossette  wrote:

> Problem with extensions is, while they are *technically* supported by
> gnome, they can break with any update (It has happened to me in the past).
> Heck, it kinda reminds me of hacks people use to get around the junk people
> put in Windows 10/11...
>
> On Thu, Apr 4, 2024 at 8:09 AM Leslie Satenstein via devel <
> devel@lists.fedoraproject.org> wrote:
>
>> There is, if you add 1 extension, a category menu.  That is the menu that
>> is similar to other desktop interfaces such as Budgie, XFCE, and other.
>>
>>
>> Leslie Satenstein
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thursday, April 4, 2024 at 08:03:13 a.m. EDT, Stephen Smoogen <
>> ssmoo...@redhat.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, 4 Apr 2024 at 04:38, Vít Ondruch  wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> Maybe you should give it second try.
>>
>>
>>
>> What I am going to say is not meant to be a bash in any way.
>>
>> I am on my 10th try for GNOME3/40. For everything they move to somewhere
>> my brain says is intuitive, there always seems to be something else
>> moved which I have to relearn or fight past patterns for.  Just like code
>> refactoring, I realize all the movements and changes are for good reasons
>> versus just 'moving for movement sake'. My brain just rebels against it in
>> an almost painful way.
>>
>> Again this isn't a rag on GNOME. I find that I can adapt only so much to
>> desktop changes and prefer something which stays the same while I focus on
>> my work. Other people find such changes easy and others find the lack of
>> changes I want to be painful for their brains. I understand where GNOME is
>> going and I agree that it is a purpose they should shoot for 100%. It just
>> isn't easy for me to stay on the bus.
>>
>>
>> --
>> Stephen Smoogen, Red Hat Automotive
>> Let us be kind to one another, for most of us are fighting a hard battle.
>> -- Ian MacClaren
>>
>> --
>> --
>> ___
>> devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
>> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
>> Fedora Code of Conduct:
>> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
>> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
>> List Archives:
>> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
>> Do not reply to spam, report it:
>> https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
>>
>
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Fedora Plasma Workstation (System-Wide)

[Steve Cossette]

Problem with extensions is, while they are *technically* supported by
gnome, they can break with any update (It has happened to me in the past).
Heck, it kinda reminds me of hacks people use to get around the junk people
put in Windows 10/11...

On Thu, Apr 4, 2024 at 8:09 AM Leslie Satenstein via devel <
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org> wrote:

> There is, if you add 1 extension, a category menu.  That is the menu that
> is similar to other desktop interfaces such as Budgie, XFCE, and other.
>
>
> Leslie Satenstein
>
>
>
> On Thursday, April 4, 2024 at 08:03:13 a.m. EDT, Stephen Smoogen <
> ssmoo...@redhat.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, 4 Apr 2024 at 04:38, Vít Ondruch  wrote:
>
>
>
> Maybe you should give it second try.
>
>
>
> What I am going to say is not meant to be a bash in any way.
>
> I am on my 10th try for GNOME3/40. For everything they move to somewhere
> my brain says is intuitive, there always seems to be something else
> moved which I have to relearn or fight past patterns for.  Just like code
> refactoring, I realize all the movements and changes are for good reasons
> versus just 'moving for movement sake'. My brain just rebels against it in
> an almost painful way.
>
> Again this isn't a rag on GNOME. I find that I can adapt only so much to
> desktop changes and prefer something which stays the same while I focus on
> my work. Other people find such changes easy and others find the lack of
> changes I want to be painful for their brains. I understand where GNOME is
> going and I agree that it is a purpose they should shoot for 100%. It just
> isn't easy for me to stay on the bus.
>
>
> --
> Stephen Smoogen, Red Hat Automotive
> Let us be kind to one another, for most of us are fighting a hard battle.
> -- Ian MacClaren
>
> --
> --
> ___
> devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct:
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives:
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Do not reply to spam, report it:
> https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
>
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Fedora Plasma Workstation (System-Wide)

[Leslie Satenstein via devel]

There is, if you add 1 extension, a category menu.  That is the menu that is 
similar to other desktop interfaces such as Budgie, XFCE, and other.


Leslie Satenstein
 

On Thursday, April 4, 2024 at 08:03:13 a.m. EDT, Stephen Smoogen 
 wrote:  
 
 

On Thu, 4 Apr 2024 at 04:38, Vít Ondruch  wrote:



Maybe you should give it second try.



What I am going to say is not meant to be a bash in any way. 
I am on my 10th try for GNOME3/40. For everything they move to somewhere my 
brain says is intuitive, there always seems to be something else moved which I 
have to relearn or fight past patterns for.  Just like code refactoring, I 
realize all the movements and changes are for good reasons versus just 'moving 
for movement sake'. My brain just rebels against it in an almost painful way. 
Again this isn't a rag on GNOME. I find that I can adapt only so much to 
desktop changes and prefer something which stays the same while I focus on my 
work. Other people find such changes easy and others find the lack of changes I 
want to be painful for their brains. I understand where GNOME is going and I 
agree that it is a purpose they should shoot for 100%. It just isn't easy for 
me to stay on the bus.

-- 
Stephen Smoogen, Red Hat Automotive
Let us be kind to one another, for most of us are fighting a hard battle. -- 
Ian MacClaren
-- 
  --
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Fedora Plasma Workstation (System-Wide)

[Stephen Smoogen]

On Thu, 4 Apr 2024 at 04:38, Vít Ondruch  wrote:

>
>
> Maybe you should give it second try.
>
>
What I am going to say is not meant to be a bash in any way.

I am on my 10th try for GNOME3/40. For everything they move to somewhere my
brain says is intuitive, there always seems to be something else
moved which I have to relearn or fight past patterns for.  Just like code
refactoring, I realize all the movements and changes are for good reasons
versus just 'moving for movement sake'. My brain just rebels against it in
an almost painful way.

Again this isn't a rag on GNOME. I find that I can adapt only so much to
desktop changes and prefer something which stays the same while I focus on
my work. Other people find such changes easy and others find the lack of
changes I want to be painful for their brains. I understand where GNOME is
going and I agree that it is a purpose they should shoot for 100%. It just
isn't easy for me to stay on the bus.


-- 
Stephen Smoogen, Red Hat Automotive
Let us be kind to one another, for most of us are fighting a hard battle.
-- Ian MacClaren
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Fedora Plasma Workstation (System-Wide)

[Neal Gompa]

On Thu, Apr 4, 2024 at 4:38 AM Vít Ondruch  wrote:
>
>
> Dne 04. 04. 24 v 0:44 Kevin Kofler via devel napsal(a):
> > Leon Fauster via devel wrote:
> >> I already had RHL installed on a Sun IPX with Gnome, so I'm biased.
> > Interesting that you were not put off by the changes that have happened to
> > GNOME since the old RHL days. I tried GNOME 1 at one point long ago, it was
> > actually pretty good. (It was very configurable back then. Remember when it
> > shipped Enlightenment as the window manager, how many options that had?)
> > Then GNOME 2 came, removing much of the configurability of GNOME 1. And then
> > GNOME 3 came, removing AGAIN much of the remaining configurability of GNOME
> > 2, leading to a very hardcoded experience. GNOME 2 was already too much for
> > me, and I switched back to KDE, back because I had already tried KDE 1.1.1
> > on another distro. And I have never looked back.
> >
> > Well, actually, I wanted to be fair and give GNOME 3 a chance, so I tried it
> > out once. But it took less than 10 minutes for me to realize that it is not
> > for me. The user experience is just too unfamiliar (the unified application
> > menu and open window selector (launch menu AND task bar replacement), the
> > always maximized windows, the lack of a system tray, the shut down options
> > in the mouse menu hidden behind a keyboard dead key, etc.), and GNOME does
> > not make it easy for you to change it. (You can actually get a pretty
> > standard desktop experience nowadays if you install a lot of "unbreak this",
> > "unbreak that" GNOME Shell extensions, but that kinda defeats the point of
> > GNOME.) The default experience felt pretty much unusable to me personally.
>
>
> Uh, from your description, I would really have hard time to decipher you
> are talking about Gnome 3.
>
> "the always maximized windows" what is this about? Maybe you are missing
> some maximize/normalize buttons.
>

By default, GNOME only presents the close window button. The other
buttons are missing, and there isn't really an intuitive way to
discover the other window management actions.

> "the shut down options in the mouse menu hidden behind a keyboard dead
> key, etc.)" this is also not the case for ages, or at least not in its
> completeness.
>

Yes, this did change a few GNOME releases ago.


-- 
真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Fedora Plasma Workstation (System-Wide)

[Vít Ondruch]

Dne 04. 04. 24 v 0:44 Kevin Kofler via devel napsal(a):

Leon Fauster via devel wrote:

I already had RHL installed on a Sun IPX with Gnome, so I'm biased.

Interesting that you were not put off by the changes that have happened to
GNOME since the old RHL days. I tried GNOME 1 at one point long ago, it was
actually pretty good. (It was very configurable back then. Remember when it
shipped Enlightenment as the window manager, how many options that had?)
Then GNOME 2 came, removing much of the configurability of GNOME 1. And then
GNOME 3 came, removing AGAIN much of the remaining configurability of GNOME
2, leading to a very hardcoded experience. GNOME 2 was already too much for
me, and I switched back to KDE, back because I had already tried KDE 1.1.1
on another distro. And I have never looked back.

Well, actually, I wanted to be fair and give GNOME 3 a chance, so I tried it
out once. But it took less than 10 minutes for me to realize that it is not
for me. The user experience is just too unfamiliar (the unified application
menu and open window selector (launch menu AND task bar replacement), the
always maximized windows, the lack of a system tray, the shut down options
in the mouse menu hidden behind a keyboard dead key, etc.), and GNOME does
not make it easy for you to change it. (You can actually get a pretty
standard desktop experience nowadays if you install a lot of "unbreak this",
"unbreak that" GNOME Shell extensions, but that kinda defeats the point of
GNOME.) The default experience felt pretty much unusable to me personally.



Uh, from your description, I would really have hard time to decipher you 
are talking about Gnome 3.


"the always maximized windows" what is this about? Maybe you are missing 
some maximize/normalize buttons.


"the shut down options in the mouse menu hidden behind a keyboard dead 
key, etc.)" this is also not the case for ages, or at least not in its 
completeness.


Maybe you should give it second try.


Vít



KDE Plasma not only has more familiar defaults (actually looking and feeling
much more similar to GNOME 1 than GNOME 3 does), but also lets you easily
change those defaults that you do not like.

 Kevin Kofler
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue


OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Fedora Plasma Workstation (System-Wide)

[Naheem Zaffar]

On Tue, 2 Apr 2024 at 10:40, Aoife Moloney  wrote:

> Wiki - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/FedoraPlasmaWorkstation
>
> This document represents a proposed Change. As part of the Changes
> process, proposals are publicly announced in order to receive
> community feedback. This proposal will only be implemented if approved
> by the Fedora Engineering Steering Committee.
>
> == Summary ==
> Switch the default desktop experience for Workstation to KDE Plasma.
> The GNOME desktop is moved to a separate spin / edition, retaining
> release-blocking status.
>
> == Owner ==
>
> * Names: [[User:joshstrobl | Joshua Strobl]], [[User:marcdeop | Marc
> Deop i Argemí]], [[User:tdawson | Troy Dawson]], [[User:farchord |
> Steve Cossette]], [[User:aleasto| Alessandro Astone]]
> * Emails: jos...@buddiesofbudgie.org, marcd...@fedoraproject.org,
> tdaw...@redhat.com, farch...@gmail.com, alea...@fedoraproject.org
>
> == Detailed Description ==
>
> With the release of Plasma 6, KDE Plasma has developed into a high
> quality, well-regarded desktop experience.
>
> === Improved end user experience ===
>
> Plasma has been at the forefront of creating a cohesive desktop
> platform that empowers the user to have full ownership of their
> computing experience.
>
> Plasma provides this approachable, highly-flexible, user-extensible
> experience with predictability across Plasma releases. Unlike other
> desktop experiences such as GNOME Shell, the APIs leveraged by Plasma
> applets / widgets have been more stable across “minor” Plasma
> releases, reducing long-term user frustration and promoting a
> healthier ecosystem for developers and users alike.
>
> This extensibility additionally applies to the underlying window
> manager, KWin, with effects and scripts that provide both utility and
> personalization, such as:
>
> * Automatically blocking compositing for full screen applications
> * Fun effects such as window glitch and portals
>
> Plasma provides a more traditional user experience that could be
> viewed as being more approachable to everyday computing users, serving
> as a smoother "on-ramp" to using Linux-based operating systems.
> Alongside its wide breadth of personalization capabilities, it
> provides an out-of-the-box desktop experience that is more predictable
> than some of its counterparts. As an example, Plasma provides a system
> tray for applications supporting StatusNotifierItem (e.g. Flameshot,
> OBS Studio, VPN clients), which is not functionality supported by
> default in GNOME Shell and requires an extension which may break
> between releases.
>
> === Standardization support ===
>
> The KDE community has a long heritage of collaborative standards
> development and supporting capabilities that application developers
> and users need for a productive experience.
>
> KDE is heavily involved in the development of cross-desktop standards
> and tools that benefit the larger open source desktop community. From
> the XDG icon theme specification to D-Bus to StatusNotifierItems and
> Wayland protocols, KDE has been front and center for evolving the
> Linux desktop platform in a manner that benefits the wider community.
>
> Many of the specifications and protocols in use today originate or are
> heavily influenced by KDE, and KDE has continued to be a bastion of
> innovation in a user-centric and community-centric manner.
>
> Notably, the following recent Wayland protocols have been driven or
> influenced by KDE:
>
> * xdg-toplevel-drag (dragging tabs in and out of windows)
> * content-type
> * drm-lease (enable applications to selectively gain privileged
> display device access)
> * tearing-control (enable faster than display framerate refreshing, ie
> no “vsync lock”)
> * ext-idle-notify
> * xdg-activation (enable notifications to bring a window to the
> foreground on user activation)
> * xdg-decoration (server side decorations, derived from KDE’s protocol)
>
> There are several upcoming protocols being driven by KDE as well, such as:
>
> * alpha-modifier (set alpha values for a surface)
> * ext-blur (enable blur effect underneath a surface)
> * xdg-toplevel-icon (enable applications to set window icons)
> * ext-placement (allow application window positioning)
> * window-id (consistent, uniform method window IDs)
> * xdg-pip (picture in picture overlays)
> * dbus-annotation (link D-Bus objects to surfaces)
>
> This demonstrates that KDE works not to just enable new technologies
> and features for Plasma Wayland, but they also do it in a way that
> drives larger community adoption, success, and growth.
>
> === Wayland support ===
>
> KDE Plasma offers the most advanced Wayland desktop experience today,
> providing support for highly-demanded features, such as:
>
> * Fractional scaling
> * Color management
> * Variable Refresh Rate for capable displays
> * Support for optionally allowing legacy X11 applications to access
> desktop resources
> * Screensharing for legacy applications
> * Global shortcut support for 

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Fedora Plasma Workstation (System-Wide)

[Gerald B. Cox]

From what I've been reading it seems the path of least resistance is to just 
keep the Fedora Workstation branding and have two options:  GNOME or KDE 
Plasma.  I don't believe that it should be overly confusing to ask people to 
pick one.  I just asked Google Gemini to come up with a suggestion and here is 
the output.  Obviously, the AI output can be improved, but at least to me, it 
seems fairly straightforward:

<<>>

Here's how to communicate the option between GNOME and KDE on Fedora 
Workstation's webpage:

Headline:

Choice & Control: Choose Your Fedora Workstation Experience
Power Up Your Desktop: GNOME or KDE Plasma for Fedora

Body:

Fedora Workstation Now Offers a Choice: For the first time, you can choose 
between the streamlined GNOME desktop or the highly customizable KDE Plasma 
desktop during Fedora Workstation installation.

Find Your Perfect Fit: Whether you prefer a clean and user-friendly experience 
(GNOME) or a feature-rich and adaptable desktop (KDE Plasma), Fedora 
Workstation has you covered.

Seamless Switching (Optional): Briefly mention the ability to install both 
environments later, but emphasize the ease of choice during installation.

Icons/Visuals:
Use visuals that showcase the strengths of each desktop. A clean and modern 
image for GNOME and a feature-rich, customizable image for KDE Plasma.

Call to Action:

Download Fedora Workstation Now! (with clear links)

Learn More About GNOME & KDE Plasma (with links to informative pages)

Keep it Simple:
Avoid technical jargon. Focus on the user experience benefits of each desktop.
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Fedora Plasma Workstation (System-Wide)

[Gordon Messmer]

On 2024-04-03 14:27, Kevin Kofler via devel wrote:

I am not sure I buy this argument. By the same argument, we should also not
call the OS "Fedora Linux" because it implies there is also a "Fedora BSD"
or "Fedora Hurd" or even "Fedora Windows"  or something.



Personally, I think the reason we should not call the OS "Fedora Linux" 
is that the trademark guidelines for the term "Linux" specifically say 
not to:


"When you are using the Linux mark pursuant to a sublicense, it should 
never be used as a verb or noun. It should be used only as an adjective 
followed by the generic name/noun. In other words, “Super Dooper Linux 
OS” is okay, but “Super Dooper Linux” isn’t."


https://www.linuxfoundation.org/legal/the-linux-mark

My opinion is that Fedora should be setting a good example for others to 
follow, and this is an area where it does not, currently.
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Fedora Plasma Workstation (System-Wide)

[Kilian Hanich via devel]

Am 04.04.24 um 03:00 schrieb Gordon Messmer:

I think this gets to the heart of the issue.  If we set aside subjective
arguments about which desktop is better or more popular, only one of
these desktops allows Fedora to publish a stable operating system which
is a coherent whole, because only one of them has a release cycle that
aligns with Fedora's.  The other desktop's release cycle does not align,
which means that a significant component of the system rebases in the
middle of a release, which undermines the fundamental concept of a
stable release.


About the release cycle: After the initial release of Plasma 6 when dust
has mostly settled down (approx. 2 point releases), they want to switch
over to a release cycle which would align (which is likely also the
reason why F42 was choosen in this proposal).


Kilian
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Fedora Plasma Workstation (System-Wide)

[Gordon Messmer]

On 2024-04-03 11:35, Andreas Tunek wrote:
From Red Hat's POV it is not Fedora Gnome Workstation 
(https://blogs.gnome.org/uraeus/2020/05/07/gnome-is-not-the-default-for-fedora-workstation/).



I think this gets to the heart of the issue.  If we set aside subjective 
arguments about which desktop is better or more popular, only one of 
these desktops allows Fedora to publish a stable operating system which 
is a coherent whole, because only one of them has a release cycle that 
aligns with Fedora's.  The other desktop's release cycle does not align, 
which means that a significant component of the system rebases in the 
middle of a release, which undermines the fundamental concept of a 
stable release.


If RPM's ELF dependency generator were better, the importance of 
stability would be debatable, but as it is, I really think Fedora should 
be more stable than it is, especially for whatever it defines as "the 
OS."  Today, dnf/rpm will happily allow users to install an application 
that will not run because that application actually depends on newer 
versions of dependencies than are installed on the system.  If a 
significant portion of the standard desktop regularly rebased in the 
middle of a release, I expect that would be a more common problem.


--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Fedora Plasma Workstation (System-Wide)

[Kilian Hanich via devel]

Am 04.04.24 um 01:46 schrieb Sam Varshavchik:

This is not going to happen.

There's going to be someone else, sitting next to them, who will be
teaching the new user how to use a computer. And that someone will
/also/ be familiar with traditional desktop concepts and paradigms.
They, like the new user, will also expect to have a traditional desktop
in front of them, that works like a traditional desktop.


Sure, but in a lot of cases that other person is a teacher, with a lot
of other children needing attention too. That means you have one
experience user vs (depending on country) 10 to 50 new users.


Kilian
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Fedora Plasma Workstation (System-Wide)

[Kilian Hanich via devel]

Am 04.04.24 um 01:03 schrieb Kevin Kofler via devel:

You make a good point there. The thing is, GNOME tries really hard to design
for new users, whom they define as a user who has never before used a
computer. Such users are basically on the edge of extinction. A paradigm
that works great for someone seeing a computer for the first time in their
life does not necessarily work all that great for someone trained to use
different paradigms used in the operating system(s) they have used for
decades.


Most new Desktop users these days have prior experience of using a
smartphone or maybe even a tablet. That funnily enough has the side
effect that a lot of them try to touch the screen when they use a
Desktop for the first time. As you can maybe imagine, these people are
very young.

Now, some people would argue that Gnome is a good design for a DE for
people expecting something like a smartphone UI but made good for a
Desktop, some people say the opposite. Personally I think it's a
tradeoff. There are equally as many (and strong) arguments for and
against it.


Regards

Kilian Hanich
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Fedora Plasma Workstation (System-Wide)

[Leon Fauster via devel]

Am 04.04.24 um 00:44 schrieb Kevin Kofler via devel:

Leon Fauster via devel wrote:

I already had RHL installed on a Sun IPX with Gnome, so I'm biased.


Interesting that you were not put off by the changes that have happened to
GNOME since the old RHL days. I tried GNOME 1 at one point long ago, it was
actually pretty good. (It was very configurable back then. Remember when it
shipped Enlightenment as the window manager, how many options that had?)
Then GNOME 2 came, removing much of the configurability of GNOME 1. And then
GNOME 3 came, removing AGAIN much of the remaining configurability of GNOME
2, leading to a very hardcoded experience. GNOME 2 was already too much for
me, and I switched back to KDE, back because I had already tried KDE 1.1.1
on another distro. And I have never looked back.



Honestly, I know both worlds of the desktop environment paradigms. 
Therefore I do not compare these two because its pointless. Both follow

some design principles and addresses different goals. If KDE do expose
some knobs to configure something in the UI, its fine. I prefer Gnome
because its more tidier (no diving into dconf/gsettings possibilities).
For the proposal: both DEs are legit, one should not substitute the other.



Well, actually, I wanted to be fair and give GNOME 3 a chance, so I tried it
out once. But it took less than 10 minutes for me to realize that it is not
for me. The user experience is just too unfamiliar (the unified application
menu and open window selector (launch menu AND task bar replacement), the
always maximized windows, the lack of a system tray, the shut down options
in the mouse menu hidden behind a keyboard dead key, etc.), and GNOME does
not make it easy for you to change it. (You can actually get a pretty
standard desktop experience nowadays if you install a lot of "unbreak this",
"unbreak that" GNOME Shell extensions, but that kinda defeats the point of
GNOME.) The default experience felt pretty much unusable to me personally.



10 minutes is not enough to do a remodeling of the "familiar" 
experience, so that you reaches the so called realm of intuition.
The latter is something that we learn over time and the desktop 
environment does not offer this on its own. It provides only a

framework where this can happen.



KDE Plasma not only has more familiar defaults (actually looking and feeling
much more similar to GNOME 1 than GNOME 3 does), but also lets you easily
change those defaults that you do not like.




PS: Imagine the first CLI steps and the corresponding bad
experience, but we have not given up :-)!

--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Fedora Plasma Workstation (System-Wide)

[Sam Varshavchik]

Kevin Kofler via devel writes:


You make a good point there. The thing is, GNOME tries really hard to design
for new users, whom they define as a user who has never before used a
computer.


So, someone who never used at a computer before sits down in front of a new,  
empty, Gnome desktop, and it is expected that they'll take to it like a fish  
takes to water?


I doubt that very much.

Besides, there's a fatal flaw in this hypothetical scenario.

No such person could possibly exist. A completely new to computers user is  
not going to be sitting down in front of a new desktop, all by themselves.  
Without anyone else in the picture.


This is not going to happen.

There's going to be someone else, sitting next to them, who will be teaching  
the new user how to use a computer. And that someone will /also/ be familiar  
with traditional desktop concepts and paradigms. They, like the new user,  
will also expect to have a traditional desktop in front of them, that works  
like a traditional desktop.


And that was the fatal flaw in the grand experiment called "Gnome 3".



pgpI4t7CKKvbD.pgp
Description: PGP signature
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Fedora Plasma Workstation (System-Wide)

[Kevin Kofler via devel]

Aaron Rainbolt wrote:
> Still, one could make some case for this. Plasma is, for one, obviously
> going to be more familiar to newcomers to the Linux world simply by
> virtue of the fact that the paradigms presented by its initial
> configuration are more familiar to those coming from the Windows or
> ChromeOS worlds, and (hopefully) those paradigms aren't sufficiently
> different from MacOS to be too uncomfortable for a user coming from the
> Apple world.

You make a good point there. The thing is, GNOME tries really hard to design 
for new users, whom they define as a user who has never before used a 
computer. Such users are basically on the edge of extinction. A paradigm 
that works great for someone seeing a computer for the first time in their 
life does not necessarily work all that great for someone trained to use 
different paradigms used in the operating system(s) they have used for 
decades.

As you point out, for users switching from a different operating system, 
which is a much more likely scenario, the GNOME Shell design is really 
confusing and disruptive, and GNOME's reluctance to make it easy to switch 
some things back (instead requiring you to install shell extensions for any 
such change) does not help. Even if the other operating systems' patterns 
happen to be counterintuitive if you have never seen them before, once 
trained to them, you will not only be able to work efficiently with them, 
but also be confused by GNOME's intuitive design that they carefully 
usability-tested on people with little to no computer experience.

That leaves GNU/Linux power users who have used nothing but GNU/Linux for 
decades. I am in that category, like many regulars of this mailing list. 
(Well, I am particularly extreme in that even my smartphone runs GNU/Linux, 
but that is a different story.) And I would argue that GNOME is also a very 
bad default for users in that category because of its deliberate lack of 
configurability. Not to mention that the same (concept familiarity) concerns 
applying to people switching from other operating systems also apply to 
people switching from any other GNU/Linux desktop environment. Personally, 
when I tried GNOME 3 once, it took me less than 10 minutes to decide that 
this is just completely unusable for me personally.

So I think it is pretty clear that we do NOT "have two equally good options" 
as Adam Williamson wrote (in the post to which you were replying).

Kevin Kofler
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Fedora Plasma Workstation (System-Wide)

[Kevin Kofler via devel]

Leon Fauster via devel wrote:
> I already had RHL installed on a Sun IPX with Gnome, so I'm biased.

Interesting that you were not put off by the changes that have happened to 
GNOME since the old RHL days. I tried GNOME 1 at one point long ago, it was 
actually pretty good. (It was very configurable back then. Remember when it 
shipped Enlightenment as the window manager, how many options that had?) 
Then GNOME 2 came, removing much of the configurability of GNOME 1. And then 
GNOME 3 came, removing AGAIN much of the remaining configurability of GNOME 
2, leading to a very hardcoded experience. GNOME 2 was already too much for 
me, and I switched back to KDE, back because I had already tried KDE 1.1.1 
on another distro. And I have never looked back.

Well, actually, I wanted to be fair and give GNOME 3 a chance, so I tried it 
out once. But it took less than 10 minutes for me to realize that it is not 
for me. The user experience is just too unfamiliar (the unified application 
menu and open window selector (launch menu AND task bar replacement), the 
always maximized windows, the lack of a system tray, the shut down options 
in the mouse menu hidden behind a keyboard dead key, etc.), and GNOME does 
not make it easy for you to change it. (You can actually get a pretty 
standard desktop experience nowadays if you install a lot of "unbreak this", 
"unbreak that" GNOME Shell extensions, but that kinda defeats the point of 
GNOME.) The default experience felt pretty much unusable to me personally.

KDE Plasma not only has more familiar defaults (actually looking and feeling 
much more similar to GNOME 1 than GNOME 3 does), but also lets you easily 
change those defaults that you do not like.

Kevin Kofler
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Fedora Plasma Workstation (System-Wide)

[Aaron Rainbolt]

On 4/3/24 16:49, Kevin Kofler via devel wrote:

Stephen Smoogen wrote:

Downloads are very hard to measure because too many things are grabbing
everything from mirrors for different reasons. [Plus various people seem
to think manipulating the stats for their particular spin on the number of
downloads will make it more popular (I am looking at the several dozen ips
which were downloading  the same spin every ten minutes). The countme
stats for 'running' systems
https://data-analysis.fedoraproject.org/csv-reports/countme/ can probably
give you the data on number of active systems.

Countme stats do not tell you though how many of those users actually
downloaded their Edition from fedoraproject.org vs. getting it preinstalled
by some cloud/VPS/dedicated server provider. If people are not going to
fedoraproject.org to download, say, the Cloud Edition or the Server Edition,
then it is pointless to feature that particular Edition prominently on
fedoraproject.org. That is why I was asking for download statistics
specifically.

And is there a statistical evaluation of that data somewhere? Downloading
350 MiB (!) of raw CSV data does not sound to me like a convenient way to
work with it.
Challenge accepted. Will reply with something of an analysis in a bit 
hopefully :)


   Kevin Kofler
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue


--
Aaron Rainbolt
Lubuntu Developer
Matrix: @arraybolt3:ubuntu.com
IRC: arraybolt3 on libera.chat and oftc.net
GitHub: https://github.com/ArrayBolt3
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Fedora Plasma Workstation (System-Wide)

[Kevin Kofler via devel]

Stephen Smoogen wrote:
> Downloads are very hard to measure because too many things are grabbing
> everything from mirrors for different reasons. [Plus various people seem
> to think manipulating the stats for their particular spin on the number of
> downloads will make it more popular (I am looking at the several dozen ips
> which were downloading  the same spin every ten minutes). The countme
> stats for 'running' systems
> https://data-analysis.fedoraproject.org/csv-reports/countme/ can probably
> give you the data on number of active systems.

Countme stats do not tell you though how many of those users actually 
downloaded their Edition from fedoraproject.org vs. getting it preinstalled 
by some cloud/VPS/dedicated server provider. If people are not going to 
fedoraproject.org to download, say, the Cloud Edition or the Server Edition, 
then it is pointless to feature that particular Edition prominently on 
fedoraproject.org. That is why I was asking for download statistics 
specifically.

And is there a statistical evaluation of that data somewhere? Downloading 
350 MiB (!) of raw CSV data does not sound to me like a convenient way to 
work with it.

  Kevin Kofler
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Fedora Plasma Workstation (System-Wide)

[Kevin Kofler via devel]

Steve Cossette wrote:
> Another route would be to go the Ubuntu route, if you really don't want to
> stop having Workstation as the default: Spin (pun intended) the KDE spin
> on it's own branding. Though I do understand that is an undertaking on
> it's own. It would still be Fedora, about as much as Kubuntu is Ubuntu.
> (Though, I don't know about 'Kedora' as it has absolutely no meaning XD)
> Though I feel like we should really only go this route if the other ideas
> get completely exhausted...

That is what I tried with Kannolo. Success was… limited, to say the least.

Kevin Kofler
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Fedora Plasma Workstation (System-Wide)

[Kevin Kofler via devel]

Andreas Tunek wrote:
> From Red Hat's POV it is not Fedora Gnome Workstation (
> https://blogs.gnome.org/uraeus/2020/05/07/gnome-is-not-the-default-for-fedora-workstation/
> ).

TL;DR: "We do not want 'GNOME' in the name because we want to only support 
GNOME in Workstation, whereas 'GNOME Workstation' would imply that there are 
other Workstations."

I am not sure I buy this argument. By the same argument, we should also not 
call the OS "Fedora Linux" because it implies there is also a "Fedora BSD" 
or "Fedora Hurd" or even "Fedora Windows" ;-) or something.

Giving a product a clear name does not imply existence of another product.

(And that is not even arguing the premise of the "one single Workstation 
that happens to use GNOME" concept, only the branding implications!)

> One of the best things with Fedora Workstation is that it is a complete
> user facing OS (like Windows, macOS and iOS) that you actually can develop
> applications for (if you want to). You don't have to target the extremely
> fluffy "Linux desktop", you can target Fedora Workstation. This proposal
> would totally eliminate the good points of having this single OS and app
> platform.

That "conveniently" ignores the existence of that pesky thing called "other 
distributions". The GNU/Linux version of vendor lock-in. Thanks Red Hat!

And besides, a standalone application (as opposed to a desktop widget or 
similar) developed for one of the Fedora desktop deliverables (Workstation 
Edition, desktop Spins) is also going to work on any of the others.

Kevin Kofler
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Fedora Plasma Workstation (System-Wide)

[Stephen Smoogen]

On Wed, 3 Apr 2024 at 17:03, Kevin Kofler via devel <
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org> wrote:

> Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> > to you? They are quite relevent to others...
>
> I would really like to see what the proportion of users downloading the
> Server, IoT, Cloud, and CoreOS Editions is compared to Workstation or the
> Spins. I would not expect it to be very high. Most Fedora users are desktop


Downloads are very hard to measure because too many things are grabbing
everything from mirrors for different reasons. [Plus various people seem to
think manipulating the stats for their particular spin on the number of
downloads will make it more popular (I am looking at the several dozen ips
which were downloading  the same spin every ten minutes). The countme stats
for 'running' systems
https://data-analysis.fedoraproject.org/csv-reports/countme/ can probably
give you the data on number of active systems.


>
> users. And server or cloud users will mostly install Fedora by picking
> "Fedora" in a combo box at their commercial cloud, VPS, and/or dedicated
> server provider's web interface, not from fedoraproject.org. I would be
> surprised if the percentage of users both running a home server or a
> private
> cloud (as opposed to a hosted commercial offering in a remote datacenter)
> AND picking Fedora as the OS to run on it (as opposed to a more
> conservative
> OS such as Rocky/Alma or Debian stable) were significant. CoreOS is also
> mostly a server thing, desktop users get pointed to Atomic Desktop
> variants
> (Silverblue/Kinoite/"… Atomic") instead. And IoT is just completely niche.
> So why do you expect those Editions to be more relevant to users
> downloading
> Fedora from fedoraproject.org than the Spins?
>
> Kevin Kofler
> --
> ___
> devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct:
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives:
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Do not reply to spam, report it:
> https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
>


-- 
Stephen Smoogen, Red Hat Automotive
Let us be kind to one another, for most of us are fighting a hard battle.
-- Ian MacClaren
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Fedora Plasma Workstation (System-Wide)

[Kevin Kofler via devel]

Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> to you? They are quite relevent to others...

I would really like to see what the proportion of users downloading the 
Server, IoT, Cloud, and CoreOS Editions is compared to Workstation or the 
Spins. I would not expect it to be very high. Most Fedora users are desktop 
users. And server or cloud users will mostly install Fedora by picking 
"Fedora" in a combo box at their commercial cloud, VPS, and/or dedicated 
server provider's web interface, not from fedoraproject.org. I would be 
surprised if the percentage of users both running a home server or a private 
cloud (as opposed to a hosted commercial offering in a remote datacenter) 
AND picking Fedora as the OS to run on it (as opposed to a more conservative 
OS such as Rocky/Alma or Debian stable) were significant. CoreOS is also 
mostly a server thing, desktop users get pointed to Atomic Desktop variants 
(Silverblue/Kinoite/"… Atomic") instead. And IoT is just completely niche. 
So why do you expect those Editions to be more relevant to users downloading 
Fedora from fedoraproject.org than the Spins?

Kevin Kofler
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Fedora Plasma Workstation (System-Wide)

[Aaron Rainbolt]

On 4/3/24 13:56, Adam Williamson wrote:

On Wed, 2024-04-03 at 20:24 +0200, Marc Deop i Argemí wrote:

Let's assume that we all agree with what you stated ( and I personally partly
do).

Why do we promote Workstation (with Gnome) over any other alternative that
might arise? (in this case, a Fedora Workstation KDE)

It's an interesting question. I would say my answer is "because it
works better if we promote *something*". Forcing the choice on people
who just want "desktop Fedora" is awkward. The reason we default to
GNOME is because we ~always have. To me, this is a reasonable
justification. Change is always uncomfortable and disruptive. If you
have two equally good options and you already picked one, you should
stick with it, not just switch between them every so often for the sake
of it. If Plasma were demonstrably, markedly and uncontroversially
*superior* to GNOME (please don't take this as an excuse to start a
holy war, I am positing for the sake of this post that neither of the
two is demonstrably, markedly and uncontroversially better than the
other), the case would be different.


Obviously it's going to be hard to make a point for either of the 
desktops to be demonstrably (and especially uncontroversially!) better 
than the other in general, because there is no such thing. There are 
some situations where IceWM emerges as the absolute and clear winner 
above everything else, that doesn't mean that the world's greatest DE is 
IceWM. (Nor does it mean that IceWM is a DE but that's beside the point.)


Still, one could make some case for this. Plasma is, for one, obviously 
going to be more familiar to newcomers to the Linux world simply by 
virtue of the fact that the paradigms presented by its initial 
configuration are more familiar to those coming from the Windows or 
ChromeOS worlds, and (hopefully) those paradigms aren't sufficiently 
different from MacOS to be too uncomfortable for a user coming from the 
Apple world. GNOME is quite different from both, making a new user's 
first reaction to the desktop more likely to be one of "what on earth is 
going on, where is my taskbar? What happened to my minimize buttons? 
What happened to my application menus? Where is the Start button? How do 
I even turn off the computer?" That's not to say GNOME's paradigms are 
bad - indeed, once you know what you're doing, they provide a nice 
environment to work from. They're just really different for someone just 
coming to Linux.


That's not to say that the goal of any Linux distro should be to appear 
like Windows - no amount of effort will make Linux sufficiently close to 
Windows to be fully usable with zero learning curve to a Windows user. 
Trying too hard will just lead to confusion once a user digs deep enough 
in. But if the end goal is higher download rate and better user 
retention, giving the user a comfortable on-ramp into the new world of 
Linux will likely fulfill that goal better than having them immediately 
climb a mental cliff just to get started. The user will inevitably run 
into the fact that drive letters don't exist, apps don't come from 
random places on the Internet, new OS versions come out frequently, 
etc., *but* they'll be more confident and have a better foundation to 
work with if they have a semi-familiar workspace from which to learn all 
these things.


Currently the way Fedora Workstation attempts to overcome this initial 
learning curve with the desktop is by presenting a "Tour" app to tell 
the user where things are. This is quite useful, but really it's kind of 
like throwing a rope to the user to help them climb the initial mental 
cliff. There's still a cliff to climb, and a steep one at that. KDE 
Plasma has no such tour because it doesn't need one. A user can glance 
at the desktop and figure out more-or-less what they're doing without 
even touching it. Ubuntu tries to make this "understood-at-a-glance" 
thing work with GNOME by adding some familiar elements (minimize and 
maximize buttons, an app menu, a visible dock where apps are, etc)., 
which *kinda* works, but I don't think that's the path Fedora 
Workstation wants to take since it requires adding GNOME shell 
extensions to make it happen. KDE Plasma, on the other hand, is familiar 
and ready-to-use out of the starting gate, no extensions needed.


Is Plasma going to be the best for everyone? Absolutely not. Is it even 
going to be the best for most? Debatable, controversial, let's not go 
there. Is it the best for newcomers? I would argue yes, far better than 
GNOME or any other major Linux desktop. Non-newcomers can find the spins 
or alternate editions and have the setup that's perfect for them. 
Newcomers can "just grab" the Workstation edition (which will be Plasma 
with this Change Proposal) and have the setup that will be best to get 
them started.



I understand that the Change Proposal is about switching the "Workstation"
concept to using Plasma KDE and that approach might have been flawed but... 

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Fedora Plasma Workstation (System-Wide)

[Przemek Klosowski via devel]

On 4/3/24 14:56, Adam Williamson wrote:

If you have two equally good options and you already picked one, you should
stick with it, not just switch between them every so often for the sake
of it. If Plasma were demonstrably, markedly and uncontroversially
*superior*  to GNOME (please don't take this as an excuse to start a
holy war, I am positing for the sake of this post that neither of the
two is demonstrably, markedly and uncontroversially better than the
other), the case would be different.


Absolutely!!

    "What's worse than a bad general?"

    "Two good generals!"

I have used both Gnome and KDE, and settled on Gnome, not because I 
didn't like KDE but simply because I don't have to think about how to 
perform basic actions. If someone persuaded me that KDE become much 
better, I would switch, but I definitely would not want to download a 
new version of Fedora to install on my new computer, and find myself 
switched.

--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Fedora Plasma Workstation (System-Wide)

[Kevin Kofler via devel]

Luis Correia wrote:
> I'm mostly a user and I can accept a change from GNOME to KDE, IF and only
> if I'm not forced to use Wayland.
> 
> For me it isn't usable in my setup and most things are plain broken.

As the maintainer of plasma-workspace-x11 and kwin-x11, I can assure you 
that that will not be the case. I have been through a whole FESCo debate 
just to be allowed to maintain those packages.

1. sudo dnf install plasma-workspace-x11
2. Select "Plasma (X11)" as the session type in your display manager.
3. Enjoy!

(It is also possible to force SDDM to itself use X11 rather than Wayland, if 
even SDDM does not work properly under Wayland for you.)

Kevin Kofler
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Fedora Plasma Workstation (System-Wide)

[Leon Fauster via devel]

Am 03.04.24 um 20:56 schrieb Adam Williamson:

On Wed, 2024-04-03 at 20:24 +0200, Marc Deop i Argemí wrote:


Let's assume that we all agree with what you stated ( and I personally partly
do).

Why do we promote Workstation (with Gnome) over any other alternative that
might arise? (in this case, a Fedora Workstation KDE)


It's an interesting question. I would say my answer is "because it
works better if we promote *something*". Forcing the choice on people
who just want "desktop Fedora" is awkward. The reason we default to
GNOME is because we ~always have. To me, this is a reasonable



I second that. I prefer to have a clean path to go instead the endless
choice. Call it *nix philosophy, Hick's law or what ever. I call it
consistency and that is evidently the reason for Fedora's success, but
not alone.

Fedora's "variants" provides a coherent experience in the particular
usage. I already had RHL installed on a Sun IPX with Gnome, so I'm
biased. I would not change the place or what defines the Workstation
variant but other artifacts (editions, spins, labs) should get better 
visibility.


--
Leon

--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Fedora Plasma Workstation (System-Wide)

[Adam Williamson]

On Wed, 2024-04-03 at 20:24 +0200, Marc Deop i Argemí wrote:
> 
> Let's assume that we all agree with what you stated ( and I personally partly 
> do).
> 
> Why do we promote Workstation (with Gnome) over any other alternative that 
> might arise? (in this case, a Fedora Workstation KDE)

It's an interesting question. I would say my answer is "because it
works better if we promote *something*". Forcing the choice on people
who just want "desktop Fedora" is awkward. The reason we default to
GNOME is because we ~always have. To me, this is a reasonable
justification. Change is always uncomfortable and disruptive. If you
have two equally good options and you already picked one, you should
stick with it, not just switch between them every so often for the sake
of it. If Plasma were demonstrably, markedly and uncontroversially
*superior* to GNOME (please don't take this as an excuse to start a
holy war, I am positing for the sake of this post that neither of the
two is demonstrably, markedly and uncontroversially better than the
other), the case would be different.

> I understand that the Change Proposal is about switching the "Workstation" 
> concept to using Plasma KDE and that approach might have been flawed but... 
> how 
> do we challenge the "status quo" where everybody assumes that Fedora's 
> default 
> is Gnome?

Again personally, I would set a very high bar for this to happen,
purely on the grounds of conservatism. Don't change for the sake of
change. I would only support changing Fedora's default desktop if it
was very clear that the current default was sufficiently flawed that it
was hurting the project. I don't think we are at that point.

> And I am not arguing for the sake of arguing. I genuinely want to know how to 
> make Fedora's default to be Plasma KDE because I do believe the whole *linux* 
> (and Fedora's) community will benefit  from having a major distro like Fedora 
> not defaulting to Gnome.

There already is at least one. The most prominent download option for
openSUSE is their "Offline image" (equivalent of our old Everything
DVD), and the top item in the list of possible "roles" for the system
(effectively the choice we are discussing here) is "Desktop with KDE
Plasma" (at least in the screenshot in the install guide).
-- 
Adam Williamson (he/him/his)
Fedora QA
Fedora Chat: @adamwill:fedora.im | Mastodon: @ad...@fosstodon.org
https://www.happyassassin.net



--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Fedora Plasma Workstation (System-Wide)

[Marc Deop i Argemí]

On Wednesday, 3 April 2024 01:48:47 CEST Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 02, 2024 at 04:06:45PM -0400, Steve Cossette wrote:
> > Alright, so a substantial amount of information changed since the original
> > submission of the change proposal. We aren't necessarily thinking of
> > demoting Gnome. The overall spirit of the CP is that we think KDE, and to
> > some extent the other spins too, need a bit more visibility on the
> > website.
> > At the very least, Gnome and KDE should be up front on the frontpage.
> 
> So, I am far from a web designer, but if you aren't a Linux savvy person
> and just decided to try out this Fedora thing because you heard it was
> nice and you go to download it and get:
> 
> our website: Want a workstation?
> user: yes!
> 
> our website: great! We have Gnome and KDE!
> user: what? what does that mean? which one should I get?
> 
> our website:
> 
> Gnome: "Get things done with ease, comfort, and control.
> An easy and elegant way to use your computer,
> GNOME is designed to help you have the best possible computing experience."
> 
> KDE: "Powerful, multi-platform, and for everyone
> Use KDE software to surf the web, keep in touch with colleagues, friends
> and family, manage your files, enjoy music and videos; and get creative
> and productive at work. The KDE community develops and maintains more
> than 200 applications which run on any Linux desktop, and often other
> platforms too."
> 
> User: ok, that didn't tell me much, whats the difference?
> perhaps I will just keep using windows.
> 
> Ok, thats obvously somewhat tounge in cheek, but if we promote multiple
> things, we need some way to describe them to uses who might not know the
> history of things and do it in a quick enough way that they won't decide
> it's all confusing and go do something else.
> 
> kevin

Let's assume that we all agree with what you stated ( and I personally partly 
do).

Why do we promote Workstation (with Gnome) over any other alternative that 
might arise? (in this case, a Fedora Workstation KDE)

I understand that the Change Proposal is about switching the "Workstation" 
concept to using Plasma KDE and that approach might have been flawed but... how 
do we challenge the "status quo" where everybody assumes that Fedora's default 
is Gnome?

Because somebody else has mentioned that is unlikely that the KDE Spin can be 
promoted to an Edition because it "overlaps" with the current Workstation...

And I am not arguing for the sake of arguing. I genuinely want to know how to 
make Fedora's default to be Plasma KDE because I do believe the whole *linux* 
(and Fedora's) community will benefit  from having a major distro like Fedora 
not defaulting to Gnome.

Best regards,

Marc

PS: thanks for the feedback to everybody :-)

--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Fedora Plasma Workstation (System-Wide)

[Kevin Kofler via devel]

Peter Boy wrote:
> We would be pretty silly if we did that. This differentiation and the
> associated quality and safeguarding criteria are a model for success and
> one of our differentiation criteria.

I think that is a quite pointless "differentiation criteria". Most users do 
not even understand the difference between an "Edition" and a "Spin" or 
"Lab". And technically, there is none. I do not see how Fedora's success has 
anything to do with such an implementation detail.

All this differentiation achieves is creating first-class ("Edition") and 
second-class ("Spin" or "Lab") spins, for no benefit whatsoever.

Kevin Kofler
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Fedora Plasma Workstation (System-Wide)

[Kevin Kofler via devel]

Steve Cossette wrote:
> Putting aside that i heard from Neal Gompa that anaconda cannot
> accommodate a « multi-flavor » media, can you imagine how big that iso
> would be? Forget 4gb, it’d probably be closer to 20gb!

We used to have multiboot live images that let you pick the live image 
flavor to boot and then install. At one point (for one or two, maybe three, 
releases only, then came "Fedora.next" and the Ambassadors were pressured to 
hand out only "Workstation"), we even handed DVDs with those (yes, in those 
good old days, a multiboot live image still fit on a DVD… then bloat 
happened!) out at events. (I even did a custom one once for the Vienna event 
in May 2015, which dual-booted the latest Fedora 21 KDE live-respin with 
Plasma 4 and the Fedora 22 Beta KDE live with Plasma 5. I did not put 
Workstation on those because we had tons of pressed Fedora 21 Workstation 
DVDs anyway.) Unfortunately, the scripts that generated those were unable to 
keep up with all the complications caused by UEFI and so-called "Secure 
Boot". (They used to work back when everything still booted in legacy BIOS 
mode.) So some engineering effort will probably be needed, and a lot of 
testing on different hardware will definitely be needed, to make the 
multiboot generator work (reliably) again.

Kevin Kofler
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Fedora Plasma Workstation (System-Wide)

[Leslie Satenstein via devel]

Topic change for one minute
With the Everything.iso, there is a recovery option, which presents questions 
pertaining to a Fedora installation needing a security scan (eg systemctl 
daemon-reload).
Has anyone succeeded in the recovery script working to completion?  I raise the 
question here, as it is not a distro issue, but a recovery issue, and I do not 
know to which topic I should raise the bugzilla report.
End of topic change.


Leslie Satenstein
 

On Wednesday, April 3, 2024 at 12:22:14 p.m. EDT, Michael Catanzaro 
 wrote:  
 
 

On Tue, Apr 2 2024 at 06:18:31 PM -07:00:00, Adam Williamson 
 wrote:
> I mean, we really don't need to speculate about this much. We did an
> entire overhaul of the project - Fedora.next - which was explicitly
> based around making it much more focused and less of a 
> choose-your-own-
> adventure, specifically including making the download page much more
> opinionated. AFAIR, the numbers Matthew tracks strongly indicate this
> was associated with a very significant immediate bump in Fedora usage.

Yes, promoting Fedora Workstation over all the other desktops has been 
key to the success of Fedora over the past 10 years. I suspect it was 
the right choice, because Fedora has grown considerably from our 
unrelenting focus on attracting so many GNOME desktop users to the 
Fedora edition that receives the most investment. But there is a 
continuum of strategies we can use to promote our default desktop over 
other options, and I wonder if we've erred too far in favor of Fedora 
Workstation and against Fedora KDE Plasma Desktop here. The Plasma spin 
is much "bigger" than the other spins, it's of comparable quality to 
Fedora Workstation, and it is release blocking. It just seems strange 
to relegate it to a secondary downloads page regardless of how popular 
it is, while the non-desktop editions (some of which are frankly 
relatively niche) get featured very prominently.

I'm not sure what the solution is here. Kevin's suggestion of featuring 
all spins equally risks overloading users with difficult choices and 
diluting our focus on what we do well, and I hesitate to open the doors 
for all spins to request a place on the main download page. I suppose I 
think of KDE Plasma as "special" relative to all the others due to its 
relatively large upstream developer community and user base, so I guess 
I'd like to see some way to elevate the status of Plasma in Fedora 
without also jeopardizing the special status of Fedora Workstation. We 
should have a very compelling reason if we're going to continue hiding 
one of our strongest products, and I don't think we do anymore. Our 
reputation as a quality GNOME distro has become so strong that it's not 
going to be damaged by other Fedora desktop offerings.

So here are three brainstorming proposals:

 (a) Fedora KDE Plasma Desktop becomes a Fedora edition. We'd need to 
be careful about how we do it. I would still promote Fedora Workstation 
as the main/recommended "leading" desktop, would call Plasma an 
"alternative desktop option," and would strongly caution against use of 
the word "Workstation" anywhere in the branding for the Plasma version. 
That is, let's continue to steer undecided users towards Fedora 
Workstation, while making Plasma easier to find and presenting it more 
prominently than it is today.

 (b) Alternatively, elevate the positioning of all spins on the 
fedoraproject.org homepage. Place the link to the spins right next to 
the link to Fedora Workstation, above the atomic desktops (which are 
sadly still experimental), above the Fedora labs and ALT downloads, and 
honestly probably above the non-desktop Fedora editions. Nobody is 
going to be confused as to which one is the primary product.

 (c) Do both of the above, because they aren't mutually exclusive 
proposals.

Michael

--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
  --
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Fedora Plasma Workstation (System-Wide)

[Andreas Tunek]

Den ons 3 apr. 2024 kl 18:45 skrev Neal Gompa :

> On Wed, Apr 3, 2024 at 12:22 PM Michael Catanzaro 
> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Apr 2 2024 at 06:18:31 PM -07:00:00, Adam Williamson
> >  wrote:
> > > I mean, we really don't need to speculate about this much. We did an
> > > entire overhaul of the project - Fedora.next - which was explicitly
> > > based around making it much more focused and less of a
> > > choose-your-own-
> > > adventure, specifically including making the download page much more
> > > opinionated. AFAIR, the numbers Matthew tracks strongly indicate this
> > > was associated with a very significant immediate bump in Fedora usage.
> >
> > Yes, promoting Fedora Workstation over all the other desktops has been
> > key to the success of Fedora over the past 10 years. I suspect it was
> > the right choice, because Fedora has grown considerably from our
> > unrelenting focus on attracting so many GNOME desktop users to the
> > Fedora edition that receives the most investment. But there is a
> > continuum of strategies we can use to promote our default desktop over
> > other options, and I wonder if we've erred too far in favor of Fedora
> > Workstation and against Fedora KDE Plasma Desktop here. The Plasma spin
> > is much "bigger" than the other spins, it's of comparable quality to
> > Fedora Workstation, and it is release blocking. It just seems strange
> > to relegate it to a secondary downloads page regardless of how popular
> > it is, while the non-desktop editions (some of which are frankly
> > relatively niche) get featured very prominently.
> >
> > I'm not sure what the solution is here. Kevin's suggestion of featuring
> > all spins equally risks overloading users with difficult choices and
> > diluting our focus on what we do well, and I hesitate to open the doors
> > for all spins to request a place on the main download page. I suppose I
> > think of KDE Plasma as "special" relative to all the others due to its
> > relatively large upstream developer community and user base, so I guess
> > I'd like to see some way to elevate the status of Plasma in Fedora
> > without also jeopardizing the special status of Fedora Workstation. We
> > should have a very compelling reason if we're going to continue hiding
> > one of our strongest products, and I don't think we do anymore. Our
> > reputation as a quality GNOME distro has become so strong that it's not
> > going to be damaged by other Fedora desktop offerings.
> >
> > So here are three brainstorming proposals:
> >
> >  (a) Fedora KDE Plasma Desktop becomes a Fedora edition. We'd need to
> > be careful about how we do it. I would still promote Fedora Workstation
> > as the main/recommended "leading" desktop, would call Plasma an
> > "alternative desktop option," and would strongly caution against use of
> > the word "Workstation" anywhere in the branding for the Plasma version.
> > That is, let's continue to steer undecided users towards Fedora
> > Workstation, while making Plasma easier to find and presenting it more
> > prominently than it is today.
> >
>
> What would be wrong with "Fedora GNOME Workstation" and "Fedora KDE
> Plasma Desktop"? I think once we're both at the same level, the
> desktop name as a distinguishing property is valuable.
>
>
>From Red Hat's POV it is not Fedora Gnome Workstation (
https://blogs.gnome.org/uraeus/2020/05/07/gnome-is-not-the-default-for-fedora-workstation/
).

One of the best things with Fedora Workstation is that it is a complete
user facing OS (like Windows, macOS and iOS) that you actually can develop
applications for (if you want to). You don't have to target the extremely
fluffy "Linux desktop", you can target Fedora Workstation. This proposal
would totally eliminate the good points of having this single OS and app
platform.

/Andreas



> >  (b) Alternatively, elevate the positioning of all spins on the
> > fedoraproject.org homepage. Place the link to the spins right next to
> > the link to Fedora Workstation, above the atomic desktops (which are
> > sadly still experimental), above the Fedora labs and ALT downloads, and
> > honestly probably above the non-desktop Fedora editions. Nobody is
> > going to be confused as to which one is the primary product.
> >
>
> I think this would be rather chaotic, but I do think we need something
> to show that the spins exist more. I suspect that a big part of why
> some of them languish and fade is the lack of visibility. It makes it
> a foregone conclusion, which is a huge problem with how we handle
> non-edition variants in general.
>
> >  (c) Do both of the above, because they aren't mutually exclusive
> > proposals.
> >
>
> Indeed.
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> 真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
> --
> ___
> devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct:
> 

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Fedora Plasma Workstation (System-Wide)

[Steve Cossette]

Hello Michael, and thanks for replying.

 (a) Fedora KDE Plasma Desktop becomes a Fedora edition. We'd need to
be careful about how we do it. I would still promote Fedora Workstation
as the main/recommended "leading" desktop, would call Plasma an
"alternative desktop option," and would strongly caution against use of
the word "Workstation" anywhere in the branding for the Plasma version.
That is, let's continue to steer undecided users towards Fedora
Workstation, while making Plasma easier to find and presenting it more
prominently than it is today.


*I semi-agree on this one. Why would Workstation remain the default? I will
admit that for new users, Gnome is best. Maybe label it as such? Something
like:**Fedora Gnome Workstation*:
- Best for new users
- Rich, beautiful user interface
- [...]

*Fedora Plasma Workstation:*
- Best for intermediate users and higher
- Superior customizability
- HDR/VRR Support
- [...]

 (b) Alternatively, elevate the positioning of all spins on the
fedoraproject.org homepage. Place the link to the spins right next to
the link to Fedora Workstation, above the atomic desktops (which are
sadly still experimental), above the Fedora labs and ALT downloads, and
honestly probably above the non-desktop Fedora editions. Nobody is
going to be confused as to which one is the primary product.

*I honestly think that would be chaotic.*

 (c) Do both of the above, because they aren't mutually exclusive
proposals.

*Fair.*

Another route would be to go the Ubuntu route, if you really don't want to
stop having Workstation as the default: Spin (pun intended) the KDE spin on
it's own branding. Though I do understand that is an undertaking on it's
own. It would still be Fedora, about as much as Kubuntu is Ubuntu. (Though,
I don't know about 'Kedora' as it has absolutely no meaning XD) Though I
feel like we should really only go this route if the other ideas get
completely exhausted...

Steve

On Wed, Apr 3, 2024 at 12:22 PM Michael Catanzaro 
wrote:

>
>
> On Tue, Apr 2 2024 at 06:18:31 PM -07:00:00, Adam Williamson
>  wrote:
> > I mean, we really don't need to speculate about this much. We did an
> > entire overhaul of the project - Fedora.next - which was explicitly
> > based around making it much more focused and less of a
> > choose-your-own-
> > adventure, specifically including making the download page much more
> > opinionated. AFAIR, the numbers Matthew tracks strongly indicate this
> > was associated with a very significant immediate bump in Fedora usage.
>
> Yes, promoting Fedora Workstation over all the other desktops has been
> key to the success of Fedora over the past 10 years. I suspect it was
> the right choice, because Fedora has grown considerably from our
> unrelenting focus on attracting so many GNOME desktop users to the
> Fedora edition that receives the most investment. But there is a
> continuum of strategies we can use to promote our default desktop over
> other options, and I wonder if we've erred too far in favor of Fedora
> Workstation and against Fedora KDE Plasma Desktop here. The Plasma spin
> is much "bigger" than the other spins, it's of comparable quality to
> Fedora Workstation, and it is release blocking. It just seems strange
> to relegate it to a secondary downloads page regardless of how popular
> it is, while the non-desktop editions (some of which are frankly
> relatively niche) get featured very prominently.
>
> I'm not sure what the solution is here. Kevin's suggestion of featuring
> all spins equally risks overloading users with difficult choices and
> diluting our focus on what we do well, and I hesitate to open the doors
> for all spins to request a place on the main download page. I suppose I
> think of KDE Plasma as "special" relative to all the others due to its
> relatively large upstream developer community and user base, so I guess
> I'd like to see some way to elevate the status of Plasma in Fedora
> without also jeopardizing the special status of Fedora Workstation. We
> should have a very compelling reason if we're going to continue hiding
> one of our strongest products, and I don't think we do anymore. Our
> reputation as a quality GNOME distro has become so strong that it's not
> going to be damaged by other Fedora desktop offerings.
>
> So here are three brainstorming proposals:
>
>  (a) Fedora KDE Plasma Desktop becomes a Fedora edition. We'd need to
> be careful about how we do it. I would still promote Fedora Workstation
> as the main/recommended "leading" desktop, would call Plasma an
> "alternative desktop option," and would strongly caution against use of
> the word "Workstation" anywhere in the branding for the Plasma version.
> That is, let's continue to steer undecided users towards Fedora
> Workstation, while making Plasma easier to find and presenting it more
> prominently than it is today.
>
>  (b) Alternatively, elevate the positioning of all spins on the
> fedoraproject.org homepage. Place the link to the spins right next 

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Fedora Plasma Workstation (System-Wide)

[Kevin Fenzi]

On Wed, Apr 03, 2024 at 04:24:08AM +0200, Kevin Kofler via devel wrote:
> Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> > Why not the opposite:
> > 
> > Download Workstation
> > 
> > [I'm a linux user and know what I want, just show me the full list of
> > downloads, click here]?
> 
> Because that still leads people to click that "Download Workstation" link 
> before even seeing the options. "I do not want to have to choose" should be 
> a concious choice, also considering that the mostly unconfigurable (by 
> design) GNOME is very likely to be the wrong option for anybody not in that 
> category. And besides:

It's still a choice. Just a better presentation IMHO for people who 'do
not want to choose'.

> > (Which is pretty much what we have now)
> 
> Well, not quite, it is more like:
> 
> [LOGO Workstation (Download Now) (Learn More)]
> 
> [LOGO Server (Download Now) (Learn More)]
> 
> [LOGO IoT (Download Now) (Learn More)]
> 
> [LOGO Cloud (Download Now) (Learn More)]
> 
> [LOGO CoreOS (Download Now) (Learn More)]
> 
> Want more Fedora options?
> 
> Atomic Desktops (Learn More) ← no frame nor logo nor mention of "download"
> 
> Fedora Spins (Learn More) ← no frame nor logo nor mention of "download"
> 
> Fedora Labs (Learn More) ← no frame nor logo nor mention of "download"
> 
> Fedora ALT Downloads (Learn More) ← no frame nor logo
> 
> So you get offered a lot of (most likely) irrelevant (to you) options 

to you? They are quite relevent to others... 

Anyhow, I think our positions are pretty clear here, so no need to
prolong this subthread.

kevin


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Fedora Plasma Workstation (System-Wide)

[Kevin Fenzi]

On Wed, Apr 03, 2024 at 06:17:59PM +0200, Leon Fauster via devel wrote:
> Am 02.04.24 um 23:32 schrieb Adam Williamson:
> > On Tue, 2024-04-02 at 17:37 -0300, Sergio Belkin wrote:
> > > 
> > > I am a happy KDE user, since the good old days of version 1.0. I celebrate
> > > this decision! My recognition goes to the enormous and sustained work of
> > > the entire KDE community.
> > > Cheers,
> > > Sergiio
> > 
> > To be clear, there is no 'decision'. This is a Change proposal. Any
> > Fedora community member can submit a Change proposal proposing just
> > about any change; I could submit one tomorrow proposing we abandon all
> > software development and open a yak farm instead.
> > 
> > A Change proposal existing is in no way an indication of any ultimate
> > outcome. Change proposals can be, and frequently are, rejected.
> 
> 
> Sorry, for not knowing the process right but where to vote up/down for such
> proposal?

You can provide your feedback here or in the discussion thread.

The actual voting on proposals happens with FESCo members once the
proposal has had feedback from the community (and of course if it's not
withdrawn, etc). 

kevin


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Fedora Plasma Workstation (System-Wide)

[Neal Gompa]

On Wed, Apr 3, 2024 at 12:22 PM Michael Catanzaro  wrote:
>
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 2 2024 at 06:18:31 PM -07:00:00, Adam Williamson
>  wrote:
> > I mean, we really don't need to speculate about this much. We did an
> > entire overhaul of the project - Fedora.next - which was explicitly
> > based around making it much more focused and less of a
> > choose-your-own-
> > adventure, specifically including making the download page much more
> > opinionated. AFAIR, the numbers Matthew tracks strongly indicate this
> > was associated with a very significant immediate bump in Fedora usage.
>
> Yes, promoting Fedora Workstation over all the other desktops has been
> key to the success of Fedora over the past 10 years. I suspect it was
> the right choice, because Fedora has grown considerably from our
> unrelenting focus on attracting so many GNOME desktop users to the
> Fedora edition that receives the most investment. But there is a
> continuum of strategies we can use to promote our default desktop over
> other options, and I wonder if we've erred too far in favor of Fedora
> Workstation and against Fedora KDE Plasma Desktop here. The Plasma spin
> is much "bigger" than the other spins, it's of comparable quality to
> Fedora Workstation, and it is release blocking. It just seems strange
> to relegate it to a secondary downloads page regardless of how popular
> it is, while the non-desktop editions (some of which are frankly
> relatively niche) get featured very prominently.
>
> I'm not sure what the solution is here. Kevin's suggestion of featuring
> all spins equally risks overloading users with difficult choices and
> diluting our focus on what we do well, and I hesitate to open the doors
> for all spins to request a place on the main download page. I suppose I
> think of KDE Plasma as "special" relative to all the others due to its
> relatively large upstream developer community and user base, so I guess
> I'd like to see some way to elevate the status of Plasma in Fedora
> without also jeopardizing the special status of Fedora Workstation. We
> should have a very compelling reason if we're going to continue hiding
> one of our strongest products, and I don't think we do anymore. Our
> reputation as a quality GNOME distro has become so strong that it's not
> going to be damaged by other Fedora desktop offerings.
>
> So here are three brainstorming proposals:
>
>  (a) Fedora KDE Plasma Desktop becomes a Fedora edition. We'd need to
> be careful about how we do it. I would still promote Fedora Workstation
> as the main/recommended "leading" desktop, would call Plasma an
> "alternative desktop option," and would strongly caution against use of
> the word "Workstation" anywhere in the branding for the Plasma version.
> That is, let's continue to steer undecided users towards Fedora
> Workstation, while making Plasma easier to find and presenting it more
> prominently than it is today.
>

What would be wrong with "Fedora GNOME Workstation" and "Fedora KDE
Plasma Desktop"? I think once we're both at the same level, the
desktop name as a distinguishing property is valuable.

>  (b) Alternatively, elevate the positioning of all spins on the
> fedoraproject.org homepage. Place the link to the spins right next to
> the link to Fedora Workstation, above the atomic desktops (which are
> sadly still experimental), above the Fedora labs and ALT downloads, and
> honestly probably above the non-desktop Fedora editions. Nobody is
> going to be confused as to which one is the primary product.
>

I think this would be rather chaotic, but I do think we need something
to show that the spins exist more. I suspect that a big part of why
some of them languish and fade is the lack of visibility. It makes it
a foregone conclusion, which is a huge problem with how we handle
non-edition variants in general.

>  (c) Do both of the above, because they aren't mutually exclusive
> proposals.
>

Indeed.





--
真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Fedora Plasma Workstation (System-Wide)

[Michael Catanzaro]

On Tue, Apr 2 2024 at 06:18:31 PM -07:00:00, Adam Williamson 
 wrote:

I mean, we really don't need to speculate about this much. We did an
entire overhaul of the project - Fedora.next - which was explicitly
based around making it much more focused and less of a 
choose-your-own-

adventure, specifically including making the download page much more
opinionated. AFAIR, the numbers Matthew tracks strongly indicate this
was associated with a very significant immediate bump in Fedora usage.


Yes, promoting Fedora Workstation over all the other desktops has been 
key to the success of Fedora over the past 10 years. I suspect it was 
the right choice, because Fedora has grown considerably from our 
unrelenting focus on attracting so many GNOME desktop users to the 
Fedora edition that receives the most investment. But there is a 
continuum of strategies we can use to promote our default desktop over 
other options, and I wonder if we've erred too far in favor of Fedora 
Workstation and against Fedora KDE Plasma Desktop here. The Plasma spin 
is much "bigger" than the other spins, it's of comparable quality to 
Fedora Workstation, and it is release blocking. It just seems strange 
to relegate it to a secondary downloads page regardless of how popular 
it is, while the non-desktop editions (some of which are frankly 
relatively niche) get featured very prominently.


I'm not sure what the solution is here. Kevin's suggestion of featuring 
all spins equally risks overloading users with difficult choices and 
diluting our focus on what we do well, and I hesitate to open the doors 
for all spins to request a place on the main download page. I suppose I 
think of KDE Plasma as "special" relative to all the others due to its 
relatively large upstream developer community and user base, so I guess 
I'd like to see some way to elevate the status of Plasma in Fedora 
without also jeopardizing the special status of Fedora Workstation. We 
should have a very compelling reason if we're going to continue hiding 
one of our strongest products, and I don't think we do anymore. Our 
reputation as a quality GNOME distro has become so strong that it's not 
going to be damaged by other Fedora desktop offerings.


So here are three brainstorming proposals:

(a) Fedora KDE Plasma Desktop becomes a Fedora edition. We'd need to 
be careful about how we do it. I would still promote Fedora Workstation 
as the main/recommended "leading" desktop, would call Plasma an 
"alternative desktop option," and would strongly caution against use of 
the word "Workstation" anywhere in the branding for the Plasma version. 
That is, let's continue to steer undecided users towards Fedora 
Workstation, while making Plasma easier to find and presenting it more 
prominently than it is today.


(b) Alternatively, elevate the positioning of all spins on the 
fedoraproject.org homepage. Place the link to the spins right next to 
the link to Fedora Workstation, above the atomic desktops (which are 
sadly still experimental), above the Fedora labs and ALT downloads, and 
honestly probably above the non-desktop Fedora editions. Nobody is 
going to be confused as to which one is the primary product.


(c) Do both of the above, because they aren't mutually exclusive 
proposals.


Michael

--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Fedora Plasma Workstation (System-Wide)

[Leon Fauster via devel]

Am 02.04.24 um 23:32 schrieb Adam Williamson:

On Tue, 2024-04-02 at 17:37 -0300, Sergio Belkin wrote:


I am a happy KDE user, since the good old days of version 1.0. I celebrate
this decision! My recognition goes to the enormous and sustained work of
the entire KDE community.
Cheers,
Sergiio


To be clear, there is no 'decision'. This is a Change proposal. Any
Fedora community member can submit a Change proposal proposing just
about any change; I could submit one tomorrow proposing we abandon all
software development and open a yak farm instead.

A Change proposal existing is in no way an indication of any ultimate
outcome. Change proposals can be, and frequently are, rejected.



Sorry, for not knowing the process right but where to vote up/down for 
such proposal?


--
Leon
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Fedora Plasma Workstation (System-Wide)

[Jens-Ulrik Petersen]

On Wed, Apr 3, 2024 at 4:08 AM Steve Cossette  wrote:

> Alright, so a substantial amount of information changed since the original
> submission of the change proposal.
>
It did?  Because the page still reads:
*"Switch the default desktop experience for Workstation to KDE Plasma."*


> We aren't necessarily thinking of demoting Gnome.
>

And continues *"**The GNOME desktop is moved to a separate spin / edition,
retaining release-blocking status."*

Or are you saying you are planning to rewrite the page??

The overall spirit of the CP is that we think KDE, and to some extent the
> other spins too, need a bit more visibility on the website. At the very
> least, Gnome and KDE should be up front on the frontpage.
>

Asking to improve KDE's visibility on the website is certainly quite
different to replacing GNOME in Workstation.

Jens
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Fedora Plasma Workstation (System-Wide)

[Steve Cossette]

Putting aside that i heard from Neal Gompa that anaconda cannot accommodate
a « multi-flavor » media, can you imagine how big that iso would be? Forget
4gb, it’d probably be closer to 20gb!

On Wed, Apr 3, 2024 at 09:49 Leslie Satenstein via devel <
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org> wrote:

> Perhaps something like the "Everything.iso" could be top-leveled on the
> website, to include Workstation, KDE, *et al,*   in their full
> "Everything.iso" details. That will let me decide, beforehand, what it is
> that I want to download.
>
> Keep the individual iso-webpage relationship simple, referring to the
> suggested new top-level website pages.
>
>
> Leslie Satenstein
>
>
>
> On Tuesday, April 2, 2024 at 03:37:30 p.m. EDT, Adam Williamson <
> adamw...@fedoraproject.org> wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, 2024-04-02 at 21:05 +0200, Kevin Kofler via devel wrote:
> > Aoife Moloney wrote:
> > > Switch the default desktop experience for Workstation to KDE Plasma.
> > > The GNOME desktop is moved to a separate spin / edition, retaining
> > > release-blocking status.
> >
> > It is funny that the KDE SIG is proposing that now. I have a sense of
> déjà-
> > vu:
> > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/KDE_Plasma_Desktop_by_default
> >
> > Back then, the KDE SIG was NOT willing to support my proposal (even
> though
> > the timing would have been ideal, given that GNOME was badly hit at the
> time
> > by the GNOME 3 transition and users disappointed by the radical cuts in
> > customizability). Now they are refloating it as their own, without even
> > citing my original proposal.
>
> Kevin, I know you and I have been around forever and 2011 feels like
> yesterday, but it was really quite a long time ago.
>
> Some of the people involved in the proposal didn't even use Fedora in
> 2011. Heck, there are probably people using Fedora who weren't *born*
> in 2011.
>
> If you compare the KDE SIG member list from May 2011 (approx. time of
> your old proposal) and the current one, the only people who appear on
> both lists are Rex Dieter and Than Ngo, neither of whom is an owner of
> this Change proposal.
>
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SIGs/KDE
> https://fedoraproject.org/w/index.php?title=SIGs/KDE=239023
> --
> Adam Williamson (he/him/his)
> Fedora QA
> Fedora Chat: @adamwill:fedora.im | Mastodon: @ad...@fosstodon.org
> https://www.happyassassin.net
>
>
>
>
> --
> ___
> devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct:
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives:
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Do not reply to spam, report it:
> https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
> --
> ___
> devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct:
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives:
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Do not reply to spam, report it:
> https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
>
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Fedora Plasma Workstation (System-Wide)

[Leslie Satenstein via devel]

Hi Adam,
I lived through the 2011 period, and at that time the number of people 
available for  KDE software support was insufficient. In an earlier response I 
suggested that a single website is where we should be focusing more info about 
the various isos.  

We don't need a separate set of web pages per iso, as it is a disadvange.  A 
user could browse the one Fedora site and select the ISO that suits his needs.

And by the way, I started with Fedora 0.1, when the printed computer magazines 
had CDs with Fedora included. (grin)

Yeah, I remember the big whoo-haaa when we went from 800meg CDs to 2048meg DVDS.

Leslie SatensteinGrandpa, aged 83.
 

On Tuesday, April 2, 2024 at 03:37:30 p.m. EDT, Adam Williamson 
 wrote:  
 
 On Tue, 2024-04-02 at 21:05 +0200, Kevin Kofler via devel wrote:
> Aoife Moloney wrote:
> > Switch the default desktop experience for Workstation to KDE Plasma.
> > The GNOME desktop is moved to a separate spin / edition, retaining
> > release-blocking status.
> 
> It is funny that the KDE SIG is proposing that now. I have a sense of déjà-
> vu:
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/KDE_Plasma_Desktop_by_default
> 
> Back then, the KDE SIG was NOT willing to support my proposal (even though 
> the timing would have been ideal, given that GNOME was badly hit at the time 
> by the GNOME 3 transition and users disappointed by the radical cuts in 
> customizability). Now they are refloating it as their own, without even 
> citing my original proposal.

Kevin, I know you and I have been around forever and 2011 feels like
yesterday, but it was really quite a long time ago.

Some of the people involved in the proposal didn't even use Fedora in
2011. Heck, there are probably people using Fedora who weren't *born*
in 2011.

If you compare the KDE SIG member list from May 2011 (approx. time of
your old proposal) and the current one, the only people who appear on
both lists are Rex Dieter and Than Ngo, neither of whom is an owner of
this Change proposal.

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SIGs/KDE
https://fedoraproject.org/w/index.php?title=SIGs/KDE=239023
-- 
Adam Williamson (he/him/his)
Fedora QA
Fedora Chat: @adamwill:fedora.im | Mastodon: @ad...@fosstodon.org
https://www.happyassassin.net



--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
  --
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Fedora Plasma Workstation (System-Wide)

[Leslie Satenstein via devel]

Perhaps something like the "Everything.iso" could be top-leveled on the 
website, to include Workstation, KDE, et al,   in their full "Everything.iso" 
details. That will let me decide, beforehand, what it is that I want to 
download.
Keep the individual iso-webpage relationship simple, referring to the suggested 
new top-level website pages.


Leslie Satenstein
 

On Tuesday, April 2, 2024 at 03:37:30 p.m. EDT, Adam Williamson 
 wrote:  
 
 On Tue, 2024-04-02 at 21:05 +0200, Kevin Kofler via devel wrote:
> Aoife Moloney wrote:
> > Switch the default desktop experience for Workstation to KDE Plasma.
> > The GNOME desktop is moved to a separate spin / edition, retaining
> > release-blocking status.
> 
> It is funny that the KDE SIG is proposing that now. I have a sense of déjà-
> vu:
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/KDE_Plasma_Desktop_by_default
> 
> Back then, the KDE SIG was NOT willing to support my proposal (even though 
> the timing would have been ideal, given that GNOME was badly hit at the time 
> by the GNOME 3 transition and users disappointed by the radical cuts in 
> customizability). Now they are refloating it as their own, without even 
> citing my original proposal.

Kevin, I know you and I have been around forever and 2011 feels like
yesterday, but it was really quite a long time ago.

Some of the people involved in the proposal didn't even use Fedora in
2011. Heck, there are probably people using Fedora who weren't *born*
in 2011.

If you compare the KDE SIG member list from May 2011 (approx. time of
your old proposal) and the current one, the only people who appear on
both lists are Rex Dieter and Than Ngo, neither of whom is an owner of
this Change proposal.

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SIGs/KDE
https://fedoraproject.org/w/index.php?title=SIGs/KDE=239023
-- 
Adam Williamson (he/him/his)
Fedora QA
Fedora Chat: @adamwill:fedora.im | Mastodon: @ad...@fosstodon.org
https://www.happyassassin.net



--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
  --
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Fedora Plasma Workstation (System-Wide)

[Steve Cossette]

It is not an april fools joke.

On Wed, Apr 3, 2024 at 04:37 Peter Boy  wrote:

>
>
> > Am 02.04.2024 um 22:06 schrieb Steve Cossette :
> >
> > ... The overall spirit of the CP is that we think KDE, and to some
> extent the other spins too, need a bit more visibility on the website. …
> > ...
> > We've been discussing it in Matrix, and we can't seem to reach a
> consensus as to what is the best way to initiate the discussion procedure.
> Figured a change proposal was probably a decent way to "kick the hornet's
> nest", so to speak.
> >
> > We essentially just want more visibility on the website, if that makes
> sense.
>
> That sounds pretty much like an April Fool's joke (and an abuse of the
> change proposal process).  A pity in a way, but perhaps better this way,
> given the miserable debate about Wayland / X11 recently.
>
>
>
> --
> Peter Boy
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Pboy
> p...@fedoraproject.org
>
> Timezone: CET (UTC+1) / CEST (UTC+2)
>
> Fedora Server Edition Working Group member
> Fedora Docs team contributor and board member
> Java developer and enthusiast
>
>
>
> --
> ___
> devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct:
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives:
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Do not reply to spam, report it:
> https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
>
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Fedora Plasma Workstation (System-Wide)

[Peter Boy]

> Am 03.04.2024 um 03:51 schrieb Kevin Kofler via devel 
> :
> 
> Fedora 21 has introduced the Editions vs. Spins distinction, Fedora 2*21=42 
> would be a good time to retire it.


We would be pretty silly if we did that. This differentiation and the 
associated quality and safeguarding criteria are a model for success and one of 
our differentiation criteria.




--
Peter Boy
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Pboy
p...@fedoraproject.org

Timezone: CET (UTC+1) / CEST (UTC+2)

Fedora Server Edition Working Group member
Fedora Docs team contributor and board member
Java developer and enthusiast



--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Fedora Plasma Workstation (System-Wide)

[Peter Boy]

> Am 03.04.2024 um 03:18 schrieb Adam Williamson :
> 
> 
> I mean, we really don't need to speculate about this much. We did an
> entire overhaul of the project - Fedora.next - which was explicitly
> based around making it much more focused and less of a choose-your-own-
> adventure, …


And let's not forget that we set special requirements for an edition and an 
edition working group behind it, which should (and does) ensure ongoing 
maintenance and user orientation in the long term (even if the latter 
unfortunately too often takes a back seat). 




--
Peter Boy
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Pboy
p...@fedoraproject.org

Timezone: CET (UTC+1) / CEST (UTC+2)

Fedora Server Edition Working Group member
Fedora Docs team contributor and board member
Java developer and enthusiast



--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Fedora Plasma Workstation (System-Wide)

[Peter Boy]

> Am 02.04.2024 um 22:06 schrieb Steve Cossette :
> 
> ... The overall spirit of the CP is that we think KDE, and to some extent the 
> other spins too, need a bit more visibility on the website. …
> ...
> We've been discussing it in Matrix, and we can't seem to reach a consensus as 
> to what is the best way to initiate the discussion procedure. Figured a 
> change proposal was probably a decent way to "kick the hornet's nest", so to 
> speak. 
> 
> We essentially just want more visibility on the website, if that makes sense.

That sounds pretty much like an April Fool's joke (and an abuse of the change 
proposal process).  A pity in a way, but perhaps better this way, given the 
miserable debate about Wayland / X11 recently. 



--
Peter Boy
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Pboy
p...@fedoraproject.org

Timezone: CET (UTC+1) / CEST (UTC+2)

Fedora Server Edition Working Group member
Fedora Docs team contributor and board member
Java developer and enthusiast



--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Fedora Plasma Workstation (System-Wide)

[Iñaki Ucar]

El mié., 3 abr. 2024 3:22, Adam Williamson 
escribió:

> On Tue, 2024-04-02 at 21:15 -0400, Steve Cossette wrote:
> > I get your point, Kevin. I would argue though that, if a user is looking
> to
> > use Linux, they probably got a decent idea as to what DE they want to
> use.
> > There are SO MANY LINUX DISTROS! Making a choice between two is
> > honestly probably not that jarring imo.
>
> I mean, we really don't need to speculate about this much. We did an
> entire overhaul of the project - Fedora.next - which was explicitly
> based around making it much more focused and less of a choose-your-own-
> adventure, specifically including making the download page much more
> opinionated. AFAIR, the numbers Matthew tracks strongly indicate this
> was associated with a very significant immediate bump in Fedora usage.


How do we measure "usage" and how do we attribute the bump to the change in
the download page? Did we A/B test the new page?

Iñaki
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Fedora Plasma Workstation (System-Wide)

[Luis Correia]

On Wed, 3 Apr 2024 at 03:24, Kevin Kofler via devel <
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org> wrote:

> Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> > Why not the opposite:
> >
> > Download Workstation
> >
> > [I'm a linux user and know what I want, just show me the full list of
> > downloads, click here]?
>
> Because that still leads people to click that "Download Workstation" link
> before even seeing the options. "I do not want to have to choose" should
> be
> a concious choice, also considering that the mostly unconfigurable (by
> design) GNOME is very likely to be the wrong option for anybody not in
> that
> category. And besides:
>
> > (Which is pretty much what we have now)
>
> Well, not quite, it is more like:
>
> [LOGO Workstation (Download Now) (Learn More)]
>
> [LOGO Server (Download Now) (Learn More)]
>
> [LOGO IoT (Download Now) (Learn More)]
>
> [LOGO Cloud (Download Now) (Learn More)]
>
> [LOGO CoreOS (Download Now) (Learn More)]
>
> Want more Fedora options?
>
> Atomic Desktops (Learn More) ← no frame nor logo nor mention of "download"
>
> Fedora Spins (Learn More) ← no frame nor logo nor mention of "download"
>
> Fedora Labs (Learn More) ← no frame nor logo nor mention of "download"
>
> Fedora ALT Downloads (Learn More) ← no frame nor logo
>
> So you get offered a lot of (most likely) irrelevant (to you) options
> (Server, IoT, Cloud, CoreOS) before even being told that there are more
> options than those (and Workstation), the "Workstation" link does not tell
> you that (even though those are clearly workstation/desktop-targeted
> options
> too), and you also do not see the full list of options anywhere, but just
> a
> list of lists. You actually have to click on "Learn More" after "Fedora
> Spins" to even see what desktop environments are available.
>
> Kevin Kofler
> --
> ___
> devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct:
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives:
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Do not reply to spam, report it:
> https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue


I'm mostly a user and I can accept a change from GNOME to KDE, IF and only
if I'm not forced to use Wayland.

For me it isn't usable in my setup and most things are plain broken.

(sorry for the slight offset in conversation)

Luis
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Fedora Plasma Workstation (System-Wide)

[Kevin Kofler via devel]

Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> Why not the opposite:
> 
> Download Workstation
> 
> [I'm a linux user and know what I want, just show me the full list of
> downloads, click here]?

Because that still leads people to click that "Download Workstation" link 
before even seeing the options. "I do not want to have to choose" should be 
a concious choice, also considering that the mostly unconfigurable (by 
design) GNOME is very likely to be the wrong option for anybody not in that 
category. And besides:

> (Which is pretty much what we have now)

Well, not quite, it is more like:

[LOGO Workstation (Download Now) (Learn More)]

[LOGO Server (Download Now) (Learn More)]

[LOGO IoT (Download Now) (Learn More)]

[LOGO Cloud (Download Now) (Learn More)]

[LOGO CoreOS (Download Now) (Learn More)]

Want more Fedora options?

Atomic Desktops (Learn More) ← no frame nor logo nor mention of "download"

Fedora Spins (Learn More) ← no frame nor logo nor mention of "download"

Fedora Labs (Learn More) ← no frame nor logo nor mention of "download"

Fedora ALT Downloads (Learn More) ← no frame nor logo

So you get offered a lot of (most likely) irrelevant (to you) options 
(Server, IoT, Cloud, CoreOS) before even being told that there are more 
options than those (and Workstation), the "Workstation" link does not tell 
you that (even though those are clearly workstation/desktop-targeted options 
too), and you also do not see the full list of options anywhere, but just a 
list of lists. You actually have to click on "Learn More" after "Fedora 
Spins" to even see what desktop environments are available.

Kevin Kofler
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Fedora Plasma Workstation (System-Wide)

[Kevin Kofler via devel]

Adam Williamson wrote:
> I mean, we really don't need to speculate about this much. We did an
> entire overhaul of the project - Fedora.next

That was for Fedora 21 in 2014! As you stated it, I know you and I have been 
around forever and 2014 feels like yesterday, but it was really quite a long 
time ago. ;-)

Now we are planning for Fedora 2*21, which would be a good time to revisit 
this decision.

> which was explicitly based around making it much more focused and less of
> a choose-your-own-adventure, specifically including making the download
> page much more opinionated.

Which is exactly what we (KDE users) are complaining about and have been 
complaining about for those 10 years. And we know many users have complained 
about it, too. If they even found out Fedora supports KDE/Plasma at all, 
which not all of them did.

The download page now is not as horrible as it was 10 years ago, but the 
main issue (the featuring of the Editions at the expense of everything else, 
making the GNOME "Workstation Edition" much more prominent than the other 
desktop environment options) is by design and thus still present.

> AFAIR, the numbers Matthew tracks strongly indicate this was associated
> with a very significant immediate bump in Fedora usage.

There is no evidence that this was a consequence of the change itself and 
not of the massive marketing done around it. Media loves announcing when 
something changes. So if Fedora changes things again to make Editions and 
Spins equal, and comes up with a fancy codename (like the old "Fedora.next") 
for that ("Fedora.equality"? "Fedora.flexible"? "Fedora.choice"? "Your 
Fedora"? Or whatever the marketers can come up with), I expect that we will 
get lots of media coverage and another bump in downloads from that.

Kevin Kofler
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Fedora Plasma Workstation (System-Wide)

[Kevin Kofler via devel]

Steve Cossette wrote:
> Sorry, that's pretty much how things are right now, is that what you were
> trying to demonstrate?
> 
> I'm not really following.

Not really. The current design is better than those old designs that 
immediately served you an ISO when you clicked "Download now", but the focus 
is still on the Editions (which are framed and have logos) at the expense of 
the Spins and the other options (which have neither frames nor logos). 
Clicking on Workstation then gives you a selection of architectures, but not 
of desktop environments; for those, you have to find and pick the (much less 
prominent) Spins option on the front page instead.

I think the first thing to offer users should be the Spins (including the 
"Workstation Edition" which is technically no different from a Spin). Most 
users are looking for a desktop distribution. The non-desktop options should 
come last, after all the desktop-ish (desktop, mobile, lab, and atomic) 
options.

Fedora 21 has introduced the Editions vs. Spins distinction, Fedora 2*21=42 
would be a good time to retire it.

And selecting a desktop/workstation download should require you to select 
the desktop environment, with a skip option clearly labeled something like 
"I do not want to choose" or "Options confuse me" (or "I HATE OPTIONS!" as I 
had called it somewhat hyperbolically), which happens to be a pretty good 
description of the GNOME design philosophy. Or maybe even just:
(·) GNOME (default)
A desktop environment focused on ease of use
**Pick this option if questions like this one confuse you.**
( ) KDE Plasma Desktop
A highly customizable desktop environment
( ) Xfce
A lightweight desktop environment
etc.
But there should be no link directly to any GNOME Edition/Spin/whatever 
(except Labs, if that specific Lab exists only as a GNOME-based version) 
without a clearly visible selection of desktop environments (which is 
unfortunately what the current "Workstation" link is). (And for Labs, the 
selection should at least visibly state somewhere what desktop environment 
they are based on, an information which some Labs now put in their 
description, requiring an extra click to see it, and some not even there.)

Kevin Kofler
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Fedora Plasma Workstation (System-Wide)

[Kevin Fenzi]

On Wed, Apr 03, 2024 at 02:36:07AM +0200, Kevin Kofler via devel wrote:
> Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> > Ok, thats obvously somewhat tounge in cheek, but if we promote multiple
> > things, we need some way to describe them to uses who might not know the
> > history of things and do it in a quick enough way that they won't decide
> > it's all confusing and go do something else.
> 
> It is actually quite simple:
> 
> Here are your options:



Why not the opposite:

Download Workstation

[I'm a linux user and know what I want, just show me the full list of
downloads, click here]?

(Which is pretty much what we have now)

kevin


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Fedora Plasma Workstation (System-Wide)

[Steve Cossette]

Sorry, that's pretty much how things are right now, is that what you were
trying to demonstrate?

I'm not really following.

Personally, if we were to promote both KDE and Gnome on the website, I'd
make it dead simple. I really suck at making graphics so I'll try to put it
in text:

I imagine a page, where 60% of the page's vh (Viewpoint height -- the
viewable height on your browser) is used to showcase KDE and Gnome. The
left side would be KDE and the right side would be Gnome (Colors don't
really matter tbh but they should differ enough to outline the difference
between the two)

On each side, you'd have a partial screenshot of what the DE looks like,
maybe with a short youtube video that shows a quick demo and some text
outlining the major points of the DE.

I would also suggests adding a thinner section below to simply point to a
page with "More choices", where you'd see the other spins.



On Tue, Apr 2, 2024 at 8:36 PM Kevin Kofler via devel <
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org> wrote:

> Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> > Ok, thats obvously somewhat tounge in cheek, but if we promote multiple
> > things, we need some way to describe them to uses who might not know the
> > history of things and do it in a quick enough way that they won't decide
> > it's all confusing and go do something else.
>
> It is actually quite simple:
>
>
> Here are your options:
>
> [I HATE OPTIONS, JUST GIVE ME SOMETHING WITH NO OPTIONS!] (big button) →
> downloads GNOME x86_64
>
> DESKTOP SPINS:
>
> Desktop:
> ( ) GNOME (Workstation)
> ( ) KDE Plasma Desktop
> ( ) Xfce
> etc.
>
> Architecture:
> ( ) x86_64 (64-bit x86/AMD64)
> ( ) aarch64 (64-bit ARM)
> etc.
>
> [DOWNLOAD SELECTED]
>
> MOBILE SPINS:
>
> Mobile Environment:
> ( ) Phosh
> etc.
>
> Architecture:
> ( ) aarch64 (64-bit ARM)
> etc.
>
> [DOWNLOAD SELECTED]
>
> LABS:
>
> Lab:
> ( ) Astronomy
> etc.
>
> Architecture:
> etc.
>
> [DOWNLOAD SELECTED]
>
> ATOMIC DESKTOPS:
>
> Desktop:
> ( ) GNOME (Silverblue)
> ( ) KDE Plasma Desktop (Kinoite)
> ( ) Sway (Atomic)
> ( ) Budgie (Atomic)
>
> Architecture:
> etc.
>
> [DOWNLOAD SELECTED]
>
> OTHER EDITIONS:
>
> Edition:
> ( ) Server
> etc.
>
> Architecture:
> etc.
>
> [DOWNLOAD SELECTED]
>
>
> Of course there is going to be a lot of bikeshedding about the order of
> the
> options. I would put them in that order, because I think desktop spins are
> most likely to be downloaded by a new user, then mobile, then use-case-
> specific labs, then experiments like Atomic, and then non-desktop stuff
> like
> Server. But the most important feature is the "I HATE OPTIONS!" button,
> because it serves exactly the users you think will be confused by the
> options and will give them a desktop environment designed exactly for them.
>
> Kevin Kofler
> --
> ___
> devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct:
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives:
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Do not reply to spam, report it:
> https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
>
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Fedora Plasma Workstation (System-Wide)

[Adam Williamson]

On Tue, 2024-04-02 at 21:15 -0400, Steve Cossette wrote:
> I get your point, Kevin. I would argue though that, if a user is looking to
> use Linux, they probably got a decent idea as to what DE they want to use.
> There are SO MANY LINUX DISTROS! Making a choice between two is
> honestly probably not that jarring imo.

I mean, we really don't need to speculate about this much. We did an
entire overhaul of the project - Fedora.next - which was explicitly
based around making it much more focused and less of a choose-your-own-
adventure, specifically including making the download page much more
opinionated. AFAIR, the numbers Matthew tracks strongly indicate this
was associated with a very significant immediate bump in Fedora usage.
-- 
Adam Williamson (he/him/his)
Fedora QA
Fedora Chat: @adamwill:fedora.im | Mastodon: @ad...@fosstodon.org
https://www.happyassassin.net



--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Fedora Plasma Workstation (System-Wide)

[Steve Cossette]

I get your point, Kevin. I would argue though that, if a user is looking to
use Linux, they probably got a decent idea as to what DE they want to use.
There are SO MANY LINUX DISTROS! Making a choice between two is
honestly probably not that jarring imo.

On Tue, Apr 2, 2024 at 7:49 PM Kevin Fenzi  wrote:

> On Tue, Apr 02, 2024 at 04:06:45PM -0400, Steve Cossette wrote:
> > Alright, so a substantial amount of information changed since the
> original
> > submission of the change proposal. We aren't necessarily thinking of
> > demoting Gnome. The overall spirit of the CP is that we think KDE, and to
> > some extent the other spins too, need a bit more visibility on the
> website.
> > At the very least, Gnome and KDE should be up front on the frontpage.
>
> So, I am far from a web designer, but if you aren't a Linux savvy person
> and just decided to try out this Fedora thing because you heard it was
> nice and you go to download it and get:
>
> our website: Want a workstation?
> user: yes!
>
> our website: great! We have Gnome and KDE!
> user: what? what does that mean? which one should I get?
>
> our website:
>
> Gnome: "Get things done with ease, comfort, and control.
> An easy and elegant way to use your computer,
> GNOME is designed to help you have the best possible computing experience."
>
> KDE: "Powerful, multi-platform, and for everyone
> Use KDE software to surf the web, keep in touch with colleagues, friends
> and family, manage your files, enjoy music and videos; and get creative
> and productive at work. The KDE community develops and maintains more
> than 200 applications which run on any Linux desktop, and often other
> platforms too."
>
> User: ok, that didn't tell me much, whats the difference?
> perhaps I will just keep using windows.
>
> Ok, thats obvously somewhat tounge in cheek, but if we promote multiple
> things, we need some way to describe them to uses who might not know the
> history of things and do it in a quick enough way that they won't decide
> it's all confusing and go do something else.
>
> kevin
> --
> ___
> devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct:
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives:
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Do not reply to spam, report it:
> https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
>
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Fedora Plasma Workstation (System-Wide)

[Kevin Kofler via devel]

Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> Ok, thats obvously somewhat tounge in cheek, but if we promote multiple
> things, we need some way to describe them to uses who might not know the
> history of things and do it in a quick enough way that they won't decide
> it's all confusing and go do something else.

It is actually quite simple:


Here are your options:

[I HATE OPTIONS, JUST GIVE ME SOMETHING WITH NO OPTIONS!] (big button) → 
downloads GNOME x86_64

DESKTOP SPINS:

Desktop:
( ) GNOME (Workstation)
( ) KDE Plasma Desktop
( ) Xfce
etc.

Architecture:
( ) x86_64 (64-bit x86/AMD64)
( ) aarch64 (64-bit ARM)
etc.

[DOWNLOAD SELECTED]

MOBILE SPINS:

Mobile Environment:
( ) Phosh
etc.

Architecture:
( ) aarch64 (64-bit ARM)
etc.

[DOWNLOAD SELECTED]

LABS:

Lab:
( ) Astronomy
etc.

Architecture:
etc.

[DOWNLOAD SELECTED]

ATOMIC DESKTOPS:

Desktop:
( ) GNOME (Silverblue)
( ) KDE Plasma Desktop (Kinoite)
( ) Sway (Atomic)
( ) Budgie (Atomic)

Architecture:
etc.

[DOWNLOAD SELECTED]

OTHER EDITIONS:

Edition:
( ) Server
etc.

Architecture:
etc.

[DOWNLOAD SELECTED]


Of course there is going to be a lot of bikeshedding about the order of the 
options. I would put them in that order, because I think desktop spins are 
most likely to be downloaded by a new user, then mobile, then use-case-
specific labs, then experiments like Atomic, and then non-desktop stuff like 
Server. But the most important feature is the "I HATE OPTIONS!" button, 
because it serves exactly the users you think will be confused by the 
options and will give them a desktop environment designed exactly for them.

Kevin Kofler
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Fedora Plasma Workstation (System-Wide)

[Kilian Hanich via devel]

Am 03.04.24 um 01:48 schrieb Kevin Fenzi:

On Tue, Apr 02, 2024 at 04:06:45PM -0400, Steve Cossette wrote:

Alright, so a substantial amount of information changed since the original
submission of the change proposal. We aren't necessarily thinking of
demoting Gnome. The overall spirit of the CP is that we think KDE, and to
some extent the other spins too, need a bit more visibility on the website.
At the very least, Gnome and KDE should be up front on the frontpage.


So, I am far from a web designer, but if you aren't a Linux savvy person
and just decided to try out this Fedora thing because you heard it was
nice and you go to download it and get:


Quite frankly, considering the goals and the philosophy of Fedora
(always trying to push for new stuff even if it isn't fully ready yet),
I would argue that Fedora isn't for Linux savvy people.


Kilian
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Fedora Plasma Workstation (System-Wide)

[Kevin Fenzi]

On Tue, Apr 02, 2024 at 04:06:45PM -0400, Steve Cossette wrote:
> Alright, so a substantial amount of information changed since the original
> submission of the change proposal. We aren't necessarily thinking of
> demoting Gnome. The overall spirit of the CP is that we think KDE, and to
> some extent the other spins too, need a bit more visibility on the website.
> At the very least, Gnome and KDE should be up front on the frontpage.

So, I am far from a web designer, but if you aren't a Linux savvy person
and just decided to try out this Fedora thing because you heard it was
nice and you go to download it and get:

our website: Want a workstation?
user: yes!

our website: great! We have Gnome and KDE!
user: what? what does that mean? which one should I get?

our website: 

Gnome: "Get things done with ease, comfort, and control.
An easy and elegant way to use your computer,
GNOME is designed to help you have the best possible computing experience."

KDE: "Powerful, multi-platform, and for everyone
Use KDE software to surf the web, keep in touch with colleagues, friends
and family, manage your files, enjoy music and videos; and get creative
and productive at work. The KDE community develops and maintains more
than 200 applications which run on any Linux desktop, and often other
platforms too."

User: ok, that didn't tell me much, whats the difference? 
perhaps I will just keep using windows. 

Ok, thats obvously somewhat tounge in cheek, but if we promote multiple
things, we need some way to describe them to uses who might not know the
history of things and do it in a quick enough way that they won't decide
it's all confusing and go do something else. 

kevin


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Fedora Plasma Workstation (System-Wide)

[Kevin Kofler via devel]

Steve Cossette wrote:
> We essentially just want more visibility on the website, if that makes
> sense.

Back when I was still a KDE SIG member, whenever we brought that up with the 
Websites Team, they would just point us to the Board (what is now the 
Council), and the Board would point us back to the Websites Team. That 
fingerpointing was very effective at preventing any change.

And the Websites Team has always been really creative at hiding the KDE Spin 
the best they could, hiding it behind extra "Additional options" links in 
fine print, even with a grayed-out "Spins" icon (looking as if they were 
somehow unavailable), while having a huge "Download" button on the front 
page immediately serving you a GNOME ISO for a default architecture (for a 
long time i686 even though many people already actually wanted x86_64, then 
x86_64 even while 32-bit was still supported) with no further confirmation. 
Any reasonable Free Software project does not have the download link on the 
front page serve directly an arbitrary file, but a download page with 
explanations and a choice of download options, but the Fedora Websites Team 
insisted that "'Download' means 'Download'" and that a button with a verb 
must trigger an immediate action.

Kevin Kofler
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Fedora Plasma Workstation (System-Wide)

[Kevin Kofler via devel]

Adam Williamson wrote:
> Change proposals can be, and frequently are, rejected.

If you look at the statistics, they very rarely are. A lot of bad changes 
with lots of criticism on the mailing list were waved through by FESCo. But 
if they dare touching a Red Hat holy cow such as the dogma of defaulting to 
GNOME everywhere, they are likely to be rejected. (Been there, done that.)

Kevin Kofler
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Fedora Plasma Workstation (System-Wide)

[Sergio Belkin]

>
> it’s not a change.
> --
> --
> Sergio Belkin
> LPIC-2 Certified - http://www.lpi.org
>

It's not a change already decided I meant :) !

sorry for the noise
-- 
--
Sergio Belkin
LPIC-2 Certified - http://www.lpi.org
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Fedora Plasma Workstation (System-Wide)

[Steve Cossette]

Oooo I could go for some Yak meat!

On Tue, Apr 2, 2024 at 5:32 PM Adam Williamson 
wrote:

> On Tue, 2024-04-02 at 17:37 -0300, Sergio Belkin wrote:
> >
> > I am a happy KDE user, since the good old days of version 1.0. I
> celebrate
> > this decision! My recognition goes to the enormous and sustained work of
> > the entire KDE community.
> > Cheers,
> > Sergiio
>
> To be clear, there is no 'decision'. This is a Change proposal. Any
> Fedora community member can submit a Change proposal proposing just
> about any change; I could submit one tomorrow proposing we abandon all
> software development and open a yak farm instead.
>
> A Change proposal existing is in no way an indication of any ultimate
> outcome. Change proposals can be, and frequently are, rejected.
> --
> Adam Williamson (he/him/his)
> Fedora QA
> Fedora Chat: @adamwill:fedora.im | Mastodon: @ad...@fosstodon.org
> https://www.happyassassin.net
>
>
>
> --
> ___
> devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct:
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives:
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Do not reply to spam, report it:
> https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
>
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Fedora Plasma Workstation (System-Wide)

[Sergio Belkin]

El mar, 2 abr 2024 a las 18:32, Adam Williamson ()
escribió:

> On Tue, 2024-04-02 at 17:37 -0300, Sergio Belkin wrote:
> >
> > I am a happy KDE user, since the good old days of version 1.0. I
> celebrate
> > this decision! My recognition goes to the enormous and sustained work of
> > the entire KDE community.
> > Cheers,
> > Sergiio
>
> To be clear, there is no 'decision'. This is a Change proposal. Any
> Fedora community member can submit a Change proposal proposing just
> about any change; I could submit one tomorrow proposing we abandon all
> software development and open a  instead.
>
> A Change proposal existing is in no way an indication of any ultimate
> outcome. Change proposals can be, and frequently are, rejected.
> --
> Adam Williamson (he/him/his)
> Fedora QA
> Fedora Chat: @adamwill:fedora.im | Mastodon: @ad...@fosstodon.org
> https://www.happyassassin.net
>
>
>
> --
> ___
> devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct:
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives:
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Do not reply to spam, report it:
> https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
>



Oh, yup Adam, thank you for correcting it. Haha, the yak farm comment made
me laugh. I jumped the gun; it’s not a change. Nevertheless, I’m glad this
topic is being discussed in a healthy manner :) In fact, on this page, we
can also check the change policy and join the discussion thread!”
-- 
--
Sergio Belkin
LPIC-2 Certified - http://www.lpi.org
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Fedora Plasma Workstation (System-Wide)

[Adam Williamson]

On Tue, 2024-04-02 at 17:37 -0300, Sergio Belkin wrote:
> 
> I am a happy KDE user, since the good old days of version 1.0. I celebrate
> this decision! My recognition goes to the enormous and sustained work of
> the entire KDE community.
> Cheers,
> Sergiio

To be clear, there is no 'decision'. This is a Change proposal. Any
Fedora community member can submit a Change proposal proposing just
about any change; I could submit one tomorrow proposing we abandon all
software development and open a yak farm instead.

A Change proposal existing is in no way an indication of any ultimate
outcome. Change proposals can be, and frequently are, rejected.
-- 
Adam Williamson (he/him/his)
Fedora QA
Fedora Chat: @adamwill:fedora.im | Mastodon: @ad...@fosstodon.org
https://www.happyassassin.net



--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Fedora Plasma Workstation (System-Wide)

[Sergio Belkin]

El mar, 2 abr 2024 a las 6:40, Aoife Moloney ()
escribió:

> Wiki - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/FedoraPlasmaWorkstation
>
> This document represents a proposed Change. As part of the Changes
> process, proposals are publicly announced in order to receive
> community feedback. This proposal will only be implemented if approved
> by the Fedora Engineering Steering Committee.
>
> == Summary ==
> Switch the default desktop experience for Workstation to KDE Plasma.
> The GNOME desktop is moved to a separate spin / edition, retaining
> release-blocking status.
>
> == Owner ==
>
> * Names: [[User:joshstrobl | Joshua Strobl]], [[User:marcdeop | Marc
> Deop i Argemí]], [[User:tdawson | Troy Dawson]], [[User:farchord |
> Steve Cossette]], [[User:aleasto| Alessandro Astone]]
> * Emails: jos...@buddiesofbudgie.org, marcd...@fedoraproject.org,
> tdaw...@redhat.com, farch...@gmail.com, alea...@fedoraproject.org
>
> == Detailed Description ==
>
> With the release of Plasma 6, KDE Plasma has developed into a high
> quality, well-regarded desktop experience.
>
> === Improved end user experience ===
>
> Plasma has been at the forefront of creating a cohesive desktop
> platform that empowers the user to have full ownership of their
> computing experience.
>
> Plasma provides this approachable, highly-flexible, user-extensible
> experience with predictability across Plasma releases. Unlike other
> desktop experiences such as GNOME Shell, the APIs leveraged by Plasma
> applets / widgets have been more stable across “minor” Plasma
> releases, reducing long-term user frustration and promoting a
> healthier ecosystem for developers and users alike.
>
> This extensibility additionally applies to the underlying window
> manager, KWin, with effects and scripts that provide both utility and
> personalization, such as:
>
> * Automatically blocking compositing for full screen applications
> * Fun effects such as window glitch and portals
>
> Plasma provides a more traditional user experience that could be
> viewed as being more approachable to everyday computing users, serving
> as a smoother "on-ramp" to using Linux-based operating systems.
> Alongside its wide breadth of personalization capabilities, it
> provides an out-of-the-box desktop experience that is more predictable
> than some of its counterparts. As an example, Plasma provides a system
> tray for applications supporting StatusNotifierItem (e.g. Flameshot,
> OBS Studio, VPN clients), which is not functionality supported by
> default in GNOME Shell and requires an extension which may break
> between releases.
>
> === Standardization support ===
>
> The KDE community has a long heritage of collaborative standards
> development and supporting capabilities that application developers
> and users need for a productive experience.
>
> KDE is heavily involved in the development of cross-desktop standards
> and tools that benefit the larger open source desktop community. From
> the XDG icon theme specification to D-Bus to StatusNotifierItems and
> Wayland protocols, KDE has been front and center for evolving the
> Linux desktop platform in a manner that benefits the wider community.
>
> Many of the specifications and protocols in use today originate or are
> heavily influenced by KDE, and KDE has continued to be a bastion of
> innovation in a user-centric and community-centric manner.
>
> Notably, the following recent Wayland protocols have been driven or
> influenced by KDE:
>
> * xdg-toplevel-drag (dragging tabs in and out of windows)
> * content-type
> * drm-lease (enable applications to selectively gain privileged
> display device access)
> * tearing-control (enable faster than display framerate refreshing, ie
> no “vsync lock”)
> * ext-idle-notify
> * xdg-activation (enable notifications to bring a window to the
> foreground on user activation)
> * xdg-decoration (server side decorations, derived from KDE’s protocol)
>
> There are several upcoming protocols being driven by KDE as well, such as:
>
> * alpha-modifier (set alpha values for a surface)
> * ext-blur (enable blur effect underneath a surface)
> * xdg-toplevel-icon (enable applications to set window icons)
> * ext-placement (allow application window positioning)
> * window-id (consistent, uniform method window IDs)
> * xdg-pip (picture in picture overlays)
> * dbus-annotation (link D-Bus objects to surfaces)
>
> This demonstrates that KDE works not to just enable new technologies
> and features for Plasma Wayland, but they also do it in a way that
> drives larger community adoption, success, and growth.
>
> === Wayland support ===
>
> KDE Plasma offers the most advanced Wayland desktop experience today,
> providing support for highly-demanded features, such as:
>
> * Fractional scaling
> * Color management
> * Variable Refresh Rate for capable displays
> * Support for optionally allowing legacy X11 applications to access
> desktop resources
> * Screensharing for legacy applications
> * Global shortcut 

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Fedora Plasma Workstation (System-Wide)

[Steve Cossette]

Alright, so a substantial amount of information changed since the original
submission of the change proposal. We aren't necessarily thinking of
demoting Gnome. The overall spirit of the CP is that we think KDE, and to
some extent the other spins too, need a bit more visibility on the website.
At the very least, Gnome and KDE should be up front on the frontpage.

I completely agree that Gnome is an awesome DE, and I will never knock that
down. But I think the KDE audience in the Fedora community is also quite
substantial.

We've been discussing it in Matrix, and we can't seem to reach a
consensus as to what is the best way to initiate the discussion procedure.
Figured a change proposal was probably a decent way to "kick the hornet's
nest", so to speak.

We essentially just want more visibility on the website, if that makes
sense.

On Tue, Apr 2, 2024 at 3:58 PM Steven A. Falco 
wrote:

> On 4/2/24 03:50 PM, Steve Cossette wrote:
> > Well, we did submit this yesterday around 2:30-3:00PM EST, guessing it
> was a bit too late.
> >
> > But the proposal is 1000% serious.
>
> I'm glad to hear you say that, as I switched to KDE around the time of
> Gnome3 and never looked back.
>
> Steve
> --
> ___
> devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct:
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives:
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Do not reply to spam, report it:
> https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
>
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Fedora Plasma Workstation (System-Wide)

[Steven A. Falco]

On 4/2/24 03:50 PM, Steve Cossette wrote:

Well, we did submit this yesterday around 2:30-3:00PM EST, guessing it was a 
bit too late.

But the proposal is 1000% serious.


I'm glad to hear you say that, as I switched to KDE around the time of Gnome3 
and never looked back.

Steve
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Fedora Plasma Workstation (System-Wide)

[Steve Cossette]

Well, we did submit this yesterday around 2:30-3:00PM EST, guessing it was
a bit too late.

But the proposal is 1000% serious.

On Tue, Apr 2, 2024 at 3:46 PM Jonathan Wakely  wrote:

> On Tue, 2 Apr 2024 at 19:44, Richard Hughes  wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, 2 Apr 2024 at 10:40, Aoife Moloney  wrote:
> > > Switch the default desktop experience for Workstation to KDE Plasma.
> > > The GNOME desktop is moved to a separate spin / edition, retaining
> > > release-blocking status.
> >
> > If this is an April fools joke -- it's a weird one, and a day too late.
>
> Well it was added to the wiki yesterday, but only picked up by Aoife today.
> --
> ___
> devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct:
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives:
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Do not reply to spam, report it:
> https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
>
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Fedora Plasma Workstation (System-Wide)

[Jonathan Wakely]

On Tue, 2 Apr 2024 at 19:44, Richard Hughes  wrote:
>
> On Tue, 2 Apr 2024 at 10:40, Aoife Moloney  wrote:
> > Switch the default desktop experience for Workstation to KDE Plasma.
> > The GNOME desktop is moved to a separate spin / edition, retaining
> > release-blocking status.
>
> If this is an April fools joke -- it's a weird one, and a day too late.

Well it was added to the wiki yesterday, but only picked up by Aoife today.
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Fedora Plasma Workstation (System-Wide)

[Tomasz Torcz]

On Tue, Apr 02, 2024 at 06:44:02PM +, Richard Hughes wrote:
> On Tue, 2 Apr 2024 at 10:40, Aoife Moloney  wrote:
> > Switch the default desktop experience for Workstation to KDE Plasma.
> > The GNOME desktop is moved to a separate spin / edition, retaining
> > release-blocking status.
> 
> If this is an April fools joke -- it's a weird one, and a day too late.

  Why would it be? KDE Plasma seem to be more technically advanced than
GNOME. This change makes sense.

-- 
Tomasz Torcz   There exists no separation between gods and men:
to...@pipebreaker.pl   one blends softly casual into the other.  — Frank 
Herbert
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: F42 Change Proposal: Fedora Plasma Workstation (System-Wide)

[Adam Williamson]

On Tue, 2024-04-02 at 21:05 +0200, Kevin Kofler via devel wrote:
> Aoife Moloney wrote:
> > Switch the default desktop experience for Workstation to KDE Plasma.
> > The GNOME desktop is moved to a separate spin / edition, retaining
> > release-blocking status.
> 
> It is funny that the KDE SIG is proposing that now. I have a sense of déjà-
> vu:
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/KDE_Plasma_Desktop_by_default
> 
> Back then, the KDE SIG was NOT willing to support my proposal (even though 
> the timing would have been ideal, given that GNOME was badly hit at the time 
> by the GNOME 3 transition and users disappointed by the radical cuts in 
> customizability). Now they are refloating it as their own, without even 
> citing my original proposal.

Kevin, I know you and I have been around forever and 2011 feels like
yesterday, but it was really quite a long time ago.

Some of the people involved in the proposal didn't even use Fedora in
2011. Heck, there are probably people using Fedora who weren't *born*
in 2011.

If you compare the KDE SIG member list from May 2011 (approx. time of
your old proposal) and the current one, the only people who appear on
both lists are Rex Dieter and Than Ngo, neither of whom is an owner of
this Change proposal.

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SIGs/KDE
https://fedoraproject.org/w/index.php?title=SIGs/KDE=239023
-- 
Adam Williamson (he/him/his)
Fedora QA
Fedora Chat: @adamwill:fedora.im | Mastodon: @ad...@fosstodon.org
https://www.happyassassin.net



--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue