/*Bill Nottingham nott...@splat.cc*/ wrote on Wed, 7 Jan 2015 10:56:31
-0500:
Hedayat Vatankhah (hedayat@gmail.com) said:
/*Bill Nottingham nott...@splat.cc*/ wrote on Tue, 6 Jan 2015 11:39:27
-0500:
...
- Even searching for -devel packages implies a target == host build
sensibility
Hedayat Vatankhah (hedayat@gmail.com) said:
/*Bill Nottingham nott...@splat.cc*/ wrote on Tue, 6 Jan 2015 11:39:27
-0500:
...
- Even searching for -devel packages implies a target == host build
sensibility that is relevant mostly to those developing Fedora, and
not to most of
On 6 January 2015 at 10:48, Hedayat Vatankhah hedayat@gmail.com wrote:
*Bill Nottingham nott...@splat.cc nott...@splat.cc* wrote on Tue, 6
Jan 2015 11:39:27 -0500:
...
- Even searching for -devel packages implies a target == host build
sensibility that is relevant mostly to those
/*Michael Catanzaro mcatanz...@gnome.org*/ wrote on Tue, 06 Jan 2015
13:51:24 -0600:
On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 1:28 PM, Stephen John Smoogen
smo...@gmail.com wrote:
So you mean that Fedora target developers are either using
dynamic languages, or they develop native software for
On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 1:28 PM, Stephen John Smoogen smo...@gmail.com
wrote:
So you mean that Fedora target developers are either using dynamic
languages, or they develop native software for RHEL/CentOS?! So you
believe that target == rhel/centos?
No, you misread his comment, he's actually
On 06/01/15 17:39, Bill Nottingham wrote:
- I shouldn't be searching for gcc, gcc-c++, make, etc. as separate
promoted to GNOME Software applications; those should be treated as part
of a development kit that's installed and updated as a unit, any more than
I should be searching for
Andrew Lutomirski (l...@mit.edu) said:
On Mon, Jan 5, 2015 at 10:36 AM, Miloslav Trmač m...@redhat.com wrote:
While I think you are right in some cases like cashier, isn't this
discussion really about the Fedora Workstation?! Since for this the
target user is a developer, can we just agree
/*Bill Nottingham nott...@splat.cc*/ wrote on Tue, 6 Jan 2015 11:39:27
-0500:
...
- Even searching for -devel packages implies a target == host build
sensibility that is relevant mostly to those developing Fedora, and
not to most of those developers that I run into on a day-to-day basis
On 05/01/15 10:04, Bohuslav Kabrda wrote:
- Original Message -
That said, what about describing the developer usecase as a project,
focusing on a user using both GUI and CLI tools?
- Get the sources (if they exist).
- Install a toolchain, GUI-based or not.
- Install dependencies:
Am 05.01.2015 um 06:18 schrieb Chris Murphy:
On Sun, Jan 4, 2015 at 8:15 PM, Rahul Sundaram methe...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Jan 4, 2015 at 9:43 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
There's already an application that does this, it's GNOME
Packages or use yum/dnf.
If this was the answer, there
On 5 January 2015 at 05:25, Rahul Sundaram methe...@gmail.com wrote:
That is potentially one way to address it. I think it is somewhat confusing
to have two different interfaces for dealing with software
I think if we do want to re-include a package UI into the ISO by
default, we do need to do
- Original Message -
On 02/01/15 11:42, Richard Hughes wrote:
Because as of now, gnome-software just doesn't fit the workstation bill
I think you're misunderstanding what most developers do. We probably
spend about 10 minutes installing development packages (on the command
On 05/01/15 06:25, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
That is potentially one way to address it. I think it is somewhat
confusing to have two different interfaces for dealing with software and
it also means that the additional metadata included in GNOME Software
won't be available for command line
On 05/01/15 10:18, Richard Hughes wrote:
On 5 January 2015 at 05:25, Rahul Sundaram methe...@gmail.com wrote:
That is potentially one way to address it. I think it is somewhat confusing
to have two different interfaces for dealing with software
I think if we do want to re-include a package
On 5 January 2015 at 09:09, Miloslav Trmač m...@redhat.com wrote:
Hello,
Am 02.01.2015 um 21:05 schrieb Miloslav Trmač:
Here, GUIs _as a category_ (not necessarily the GUIs we are currently
providing) should always be better than CLIs _as a category_ simply
because the GUI can in the
On 02/01/15 21:05, Miloslav Trmač wrote:
- Original Message -
well, and that is why there are tasks you *can * do 1000 times more
better in a terminal or in a 3-liner shell script with one or two params
and others where you are much faster using the GUI
this world is grey
hence
On 05/01/15 17:35, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
Here in the fourth world USA, we aren't actually seeing a decrease in
slow lines but an increase as the oligarchy in control of networks is
figuring out ways to advertise faster speeds but actually only deliver
much slower ones. You can get 200 MB
Am 05.01.2015 um 17:09 schrieb Miloslav Trmač:
but you can't and won't use the GUI the same way on remote machines over
slow lines
Those slow lines are disappearing, and will be pretty rare by the time we get
any UI design finished and polished
sorry, but that is nonsense
my home
Am 05.01.2015 um 17:48 schrieb Alec Leamas:
I don't envy how the political climate on your continent has affected
this for you. However, connecting to the top of this sub-thread, for the
Fedora Workstation usecase this is not necessarily that bad - a
developer works normally with local tools,
On 05/01/15 19:10, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 05.01.2015 um 17:48 schrieb Alec Leamas:
I don't envy how the political climate on your continent has affected
this for you. However, connecting to the top of this sub-thread, for the
Fedora Workstation usecase this is not necessarily that bad - a
While I think you are right in some cases like cashier, isn't this
discussion really about the Fedora Workstation?! Since for this the
target user is a developer, can we just agree that in this case the user
needs both CLI and GUI apps (although some developers certainly sticks
to one of
and developers deserve a better environment.
No, developers deserve the environment they ask for, not what someone
else thinks is better.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct:
Am 05.01.2015 um 19:36 schrieb Miloslav Trmač:
While I think you are right in some cases like cashier, isn't this
discussion really about the Fedora Workstation?! Since for this the
target user is a developer, can we just agree that in this case the user
needs both CLI and GUI apps (although
(on CLI)
and developers deserve a better environment.
No, developers deserve the environment they ask for, not what someone
else thinks is better.
There are aspects of the shell that are a matter of pure preference, like
syntax coloring.
There are aspects where personal preference or
On Mon, Jan 5, 2015 at 10:36 AM, Miloslav Trmač m...@redhat.com wrote:
While I think you are right in some cases like cashier, isn't this
discussion really about the Fedora Workstation?! Since for this the
target user is a developer, can we just agree that in this case the user
needs both CLI
On 5 January 2015 at 15:23, Rahul Sundaram methe...@gmail.com wrote:
Which designers?
I'd prefer either aday or jimmac in #gnome-design as they did most of
the original designs, but Mo and Ryan also know the UX well.
Richard
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Hi
On Mon, Jan 5, 2015 at 4:18 AM, Richard Hughes wrote:
Also, if any UI changes need to happen, the time to talk to the
designers is NOW.
Which designers?
Rahul
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of
On 05/01/15 10:04, Bohuslav Kabrda wrote:
- Original Message -
On 02/01/15 11:42, Richard Hughes wrote:
Because as of now, gnome-software just doesn't fit the workstation bill
I think you're misunderstanding what most developers do. We probably
spend about 10 minutes installing
Hello,
Am 02.01.2015 um 21:05 schrieb Miloslav Trmač:
Here, GUIs _as a category_ (not necessarily the GUIs we are currently
providing) should always be better than CLIs _as a category_ simply
because the GUI can in the worst case just copy the CLI layout and
behavior so it will not be
Hi
On Mon, Jan 5, 2015 at 2:48 PM, Richard Hughes wrote:
I'd prefer either aday or jimmac in #gnome-design as they did most of
the original designs, but Mo and Ryan also know the UX well.
Pinged jimmac and ryan on that channel.
Rahul
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
On 4 January 2015 at 02:45, Rahul Sundaram methe...@gmail.com wrote:
Another alternative would be for GNOME Software to show packages perhaps
optionally and deprioritize packages in the listing
We're not filtering out packages that don't qualify as applications.
GNOME Software only searches the
Hi
On Sun, Jan 4, 2015 at 8:46 AM, Richard Hughes wrote:
We're not filtering out packages that don't qualify as applications.
GNOME Software only searches the AppStream metadata
Yes. My suggestion was to change that
Rahul
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
- Original Message -
From: Alec Leamas leamas.a...@gmail.com
To: Development discussions related to Fedora
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Sent: Saturday, January 3, 2015 10:19:30 PM
Subject: Re: Ramblings and questions regarding Fedora,but stemming
from gnome-software and
Gary Scarborough wrote:
Is workstation being aimed at new users or developers? And is the goal
the same for Gnome? If Gnome is aiming to cater to new users, then is it
the right primary DE for fedora? There seems to be a misalignment here.
I've been pointing out that misalignment from day
/*Aleksandar Kurtakov akurt...@redhat.com*/ wrote on Sun, 4 Jan 2015
02:55:17 -0500 (EST):
- Original Message -
From: Hedayat Vatankhah hedayat@gmail.com
To: Development discussions related to Fedora devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Sent: Friday, January 2, 2015 11:15:58 PM
On Sun, Jan 4, 2015 at 8:15 PM, Rahul Sundaram methe...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi
On Sun, Jan 4, 2015 at 9:43 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
There's already an application that does this, it's GNOME
Packages or use yum/dnf.
If this was the answer, there wouldn't be so many repeated discussions about
Hi
On Mon, Jan 5, 2015 at 12:18 AM, Chris Murphy wrote:
So what exactly is the problem the target audience has? They want
GNOME Packages to be included again by default so they have both an
application GUI installer, and a packages GUI installer?
That is potentially one way to address it.
On 01/04/2015 06:46 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Gary Scarborough wrote:
Is workstation being aimed at new users or developers? And is the goal
the same for Gnome? If Gnome is aiming to cater to new users, then is it
the right primary DE for fedora? There seems to be a misalignment here.
I've
Hi
On Sun, Jan 4, 2015 at 9:43 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
There's already an application that does this, it's GNOME
Packages or use yum/dnf.
If this was the answer, there wouldn't be so many repeated discussions
about it. Users don't differentiate between say htop and geany as much as
the
On Sun, Jan 4, 2015 at 9:57 AM, Rahul Sundaram methe...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi
On Sun, Jan 4, 2015 at 8:46 AM, Richard Hughes wrote:
We're not filtering out packages that don't qualify as applications.
GNOME Software only searches the AppStream metadata
Yes. My suggestion was to change that
On 02/01/15 11:42, Richard Hughes wrote:
Because as of now, gnome-software just doesn't fit the workstation bill
I think you're misunderstanding what most developers do. We probably
spend about 10 minutes installing development packages (on the command
line) when setting up a new OS instance.
/*Alec Leamas leamas.a...@gmail.com*/ wrote on Sat, 03 Jan 2015
14:57:10 +0100:
On 02/01/15 11:42, Richard Hughes wrote:
That said, my gut feeling is that the balance between simplicity and
functionality is quite different for a novice user and a developer
and that this needs to be
/*Luya Tshimbalanga*/ wrote on Fri, 02 Jan 2015 17:29:14 -0800:
On 02/01/15 01:15 PM, Hedayat Vatankhah wrote:
Probably true, but it already includes fonts and input sources. So,
someone has felt that 'front-end applications only' is too narrow.
Now, where you can draw the line?
I
On 03/01/15 20:26, Hedayat Vatankhah wrote:
/*Luya Tshimbalanga*/ wrote on Fri, 02 Jan 2015 17:29:14 -0800:
Add-ons cannot cover development libraries, unless every library is
an add-on for all IDEs!
Then is IDE packaging issue. When it comes of using a development
applications, the
On Sat, 3 Jan 2015 15:56:55 -0500
Gary Scarborough gscarboro...@gmail.com wrote:
Sorry this is a bit late but I had a few thoughts on what I have read
in this thread:
Is workstation being aimed at new users or developers? And is the
goal the same for Gnome? If Gnome is aiming to cater to
Sorry this is a bit late but I had a few thoughts on what I have read in
this thread:
Is workstation being aimed at new users or developers? And is the goal the
same for Gnome? If Gnome is aiming to cater to new users, then is it the
right primary DE for fedora? There seems to be a
/*Kevin Fenzi*/ wrote on Sat, 3 Jan 2015 14:09:11 -0700:
On Sat, 3 Jan 2015 15:56:55 -0500
Gary Scarborough gscarboro...@gmail.com wrote:
...
Instead of hiding the CLI from new users, why not simply give them the
option of avoiding it? Instead of only showing gui apps, why not
show all with
On 3 January 2015 at 20:56, Gary Scarborough gscarboro...@gmail.com wrote:
Is workstation being aimed at new users or developers?
I don't think people fit clearly in these simplistic groups. I'm an
experienced GNOME developer, but I've never used C# before.
A package manager that can show ALL
On Sat, Jan 3, 2015 at 3:12 PM, Richard Hughes hughsi...@gmail.com
wrote:
If you type package into the dash the fist entry is GNOME Packages
which is the install/remove tool from gnome-packagekit. You can
install it with three clicks. I don't think it makes sense to install
it by default.
We
Hi
On Sat, Jan 3, 2015 at 6:20 PM, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
We may have been too aggressive in removing it. I think we could include
it by default if it had a first-run dialog that briefly explains what a
package is, and that package management is an advanced tool for system
administrators.
On Wed, Dec 31, 2014 at 8:25 AM, Richard Hughes hughsi...@gmail.com wrote:
On 30 December 2014 at 23:31, Chris Murphy li...@colorremedies.com wrote:
b.) Would it be helpful, friendlier, and better emphasize the special
focus, if these group install items mentioned above were exposed in
GNOME
- Original Message -
From: Hedayat Vatankhah hedayat@gmail.com
To: Development discussions related to Fedora
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Sent: Friday, January 2, 2015 11:15:58 PM
Subject: Re: Ramblings and questions regarding Fedora,but stemming
from gnome-software
On 31/12/14 16:25, Richard Hughes wrote:
On 30 December 2014 at 23:31, Chris Murphy li...@colorremedies.com wrote:
b.) Would it be helpful, friendlier, and better emphasize the special
focus, if these group install items mentioned above were exposed in
GNOME Software with an appropriate icon?
On 2 January 2015 at 10:02, Alec Leamas leamas.a...@gmail.com wrote:
Here is a some common ground, indeed. Seems that we agree on that installing
CLI stuff is something that should be handled in a developer-oriented
workstation
If you're using gcc, you're using a terminal. We supply two
- Original Message -
well, and that is why there are tasks you *can * do 1000 times more
better in a terminal or in a 3-liner shell script with one or two params
and others where you are much faster using the GUI
this world is grey
hence everybody start using Linux should *know*
On Fri, Jan 2, 2015 at 10:47 PM, Reindl Harald h.rei...@thelounge.net wrote:
Am 02.01.2015 um 21:05 schrieb Miloslav Trmač:
Here, GUIs _as a category_ (not necessarily the GUIs we are currently
providing) should always be better than CLIs _as a category_ simply because
the GUI can in the
/*Luya Tshimbalanga*/ wrote on Fri, 02 Jan 2015 12:25:49 -0800:
On 01/01/15 04:21 PM, Hedayat Vatankhah wrote:
Well, I was really surprised that developers are considered a target
audience here. GNOME Software *might* be considered good enough for
normal users, but its far from usable
On 02/01/15 01:15 PM, Hedayat Vatankhah wrote:
Probably true, but it already includes fonts and input sources. So,
someone has felt that 'front-end applications only' is too narrow.
Now, where you can draw the line?
I exaggerated.
Did you try that? The problem with searching for C++ is
On 01/01/15 04:21 PM, Hedayat Vatankhah wrote:
Well, I was really surprised that developers are considered a target
audience here. GNOME Software *might* be considered good enough for
normal users, but its far from usable for a developer; even a
developer who don't want to touch the
Am 02.01.2015 um 21:05 schrieb Miloslav Trmač:
Here, GUIs _as a category_ (not necessarily the GUIs we are currently
providing) should always be better than CLIs _as a category_ simply because the
GUI can in the worst case just copy the CLI layout and behavior so it will not
be worse than a
/*Michael Catanzaro mcatanz...@gnome.org*/ wrote on Sun, 28 Dec 2014
11:05:00 -0600:
On Sun, Dec 28, 2014 at 9:48 AM, Alec Leamas leamas.a...@gmail.com
wrote:
Possibly. But isn't there quite a difference between the novice
user and the Fedora Workstation target user i. e., developers?
Not
Am Wed, 31 Dec 2014 11:25:58 +
schrieb devel-requ...@lists.fedoraproject.org:
Message: 3
Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2014 13:58:47 -0800
From: Luya Tshimbalanga l...@fedoraproject.org
To: Development discussions related to Fedora
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Subject: Re: Ramblings and
On 30 December 2014 at 23:31, Chris Murphy li...@colorremedies.com wrote:
b.) Would it be helpful, friendlier, and better emphasize the special
focus, if these group install items mentioned above were exposed in
GNOME Software with an appropriate icon?
We could do this right now, although I
On 12/29/2014 04:48 PM, Alec Leamas wrote:
Fair enough. But to me, adding GNOME Software (GS) also cannot install
compilers, interpreters and other CLI tools creates a more problematic
situation.
To me, Fedora Workstation w/ Gnome is an incarnation of GnomeOS - An
OS aimed at single-user,
On 30/12/14 13:07, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
On 12/29/2014 04:48 PM, Alec Leamas wrote:
And if walking this path, the Workstation default mode would be the one
corresponding to a developer, right?
Define Workstation. I don't know which audience the people, who
implemented it, were aiming at -
Am 30.12.2014 um 13:07 schrieb Ralf Corsepius:
Is GS intended to be a one size fits all solution for both novice
users and the workstation target developer user?
I don't know if it's aimed at being a one size fits all solution. To
me, it's a matter of fact, that in general, there can never
On 30 December 2014 at 01:26, Rahul Sundaram methe...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi
On Mon, Dec 29, 2014 at 7:36 PM, Ian Malone wrote:
Minor correction, CentOS is unbranded RHEL and Fedora is not RHEL
upstream (so far as I am aware anyway).
That is incorrect. Fedora is upstream for RHEL and
* Ian Malone [30/12/2014 13:09] :
On 30 December 2014 at 01:26, Rahul Sundaram methe...@gmail.com wrote:
That is incorrect. Fedora is upstream for RHEL and therefore upstream for
CentOS as well albeit, one step removed.
I stand corrected then. Anyone know when this changed?
This has
On 30 December 2014 at 13:13, Emmanuel Seyman emman...@seyman.fr wrote:
* Ian Malone [30/12/2014 13:09] :
On 30 December 2014 at 01:26, Rahul Sundaram methe...@gmail.com wrote:
That is incorrect. Fedora is upstream for RHEL and therefore upstream for
CentOS as well albeit, one step
On 30/12/14 04:07 AM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
On 12/29/2014 04:48 PM, Alec Leamas wrote:
Fair enough. But to me, adding GNOME Software (GS) also cannot install
compilers, interpreters and other CLI tools creates a more problematic
situation.
To me, Fedora Workstation w/ Gnome is an incarnation
On 29/12/14 04:33 AM, Alec Leamas wrote:
This certainly works, but is it really a reasonable trade-off in a
developer context where things like compilers and interpreters are
part of the very core? What role does Gnome Software play here? How
fruitful is the idea to hide packages in this
On 30/12/14 20:57, Luya Tshimbalanga wrote:
On 29/12/14 04:33 AM, Alec Leamas wrote:
This certainly works, but is it really a reasonable trade-off in a
developer context where things like compilers and interpreters are
part of the very core? What role does Gnome Software play here? How
On 30/12/14 12:34 PM, Alec Leamas wrote:
On 30/12/14 20:57, Luya Tshimbalanga wrote:
On 29/12/14 04:33 AM, Alec Leamas wrote:
This certainly works, but is it really a reasonable trade-off in a
developer context where things like compilers and interpreters are
part of the very core? What role
On 30/12/14 22:58, Luya Tshimbalanga wrote:
On 30/12/14 12:34 PM, Alec Leamas wrote:
On 30/12/14 20:57, Luya Tshimbalanga wrote:
On 29/12/14 04:33 AM, Alec Leamas wrote:
Gnome Software is to abstract the package concept to only
focus on applications accessible to desktop.
Agreed. And I
On 30/12/14 22:58, Luya Tshimbalanga wrote:
On 30/12/14 12:34 PM, Alec Leamas wrote:
On 30/12/14 20:57, Luya Tshimbalanga wrote:
Bottom line: isn't there is a mismatch between Gnome Software (GUI
applications only) and the idea of a developer using both CLI and GUI
tools? And if so, how
2014-12-30 23:58 GMT+02:00 Luya Tshimbalanga l...@fedoraproject.org:
MATE apps not visible means they needed app-data included on their
.desktop files hence the pleas from Richard Hughes.
Perhaps I couldn't get my thoughts in order when I started this thread, but
among the things I wrote was
The Workstation PRD explicitly, more than once states developers of
all sorts are the primary target market. The special focus is for a
platform for application development.
I wonder two things:
a.) Should more developer tools be installed by default?
'dnf group list' shows the following items
On 12/29/2014 04:28 AM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
On 28 December 2014 at 17:32, Ralf Corsepius rc040...@freenet.de
mailto:rc040...@freenet.de wrote:
On 12/29/2014 12:58 AM, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
On Sun, Dec 28, 2014 at 2:42 PM, Alec Leamas
leamas.a...@gmail.com
On 29 December 2014 at 03:28, Stephen John Smoogen smo...@gmail.com wrote:
we either are going to have to get out of the way of the
steamroller or get rolled over it.
...and the people trying to keep up are getting eggs thrown at them. I
know lots of Red Hat developers worn down by the
Am 29.12.2014 um 04:28 schrieb Stephen John Smoogen:
It is your age, and there has been nothing gradual about it.. Look the
world has moved a lot in the last 30 years, and we have gone past the
point where current developers are humouring us old folk for making
jokes about IDE-operators
no,
Am 29.12.2014 um 10:50 schrieb Richard Hughes:
On 29 December 2014 at 03:28, Stephen John Smoogen smo...@gmail.com wrote:
we either are going to have to get out of the way of the
steamroller or get rolled over it.
...and the people trying to keep up are getting eggs thrown at them. I
know
On 29/12/14 10:50, Richard Hughes wrote:
On 29 December 2014 at 03:28, Stephen John Smoogen smo...@gmail.com wrote:
we either are going to have to get out of the way of the
steamroller or get rolled over it.
[cut]
Linux isn't UNIX. The desktop doesn't revolve about command line tools
2014-12-29 14:10 GMT+02:00 Reindl Harald h.rei...@thelounge.net:
that's why i call it harmful try to hide the shell from users
Well, to be fair nobody is trying to hide the shell and GNOME terminal has
received some love in the latest releases. Package suggestions in the
terminal can be useful
On 28 December 2014 at 15:48, Alec Leamas leamas.a...@gmail.com wrote:
wouldn't it raise questions about the Gnome Software application's role in
the workstation product?
I don't think it does, no. I'm a Red Hat employee, a Fedora user, but
also a GNOME developer. I'm not terribly keen pushing
On Mon, Dec 29, 2014 at 3:00 AM, Ralf Corsepius rc040...@freenet.de
wrote:
I.e. a Linux distro, which is not supporting terminals/editors as part
of a developer oriented distro has not done its homework.
We should support both terminal-oriented and IDE-oriented workflows.
Right now, we have a
On 29/12/14 16:18, Richard Hughes wrote:
On 28 December 2014 at 15:48, Alec Leamas leamas.a...@gmail.com wrote:
wouldn't it raise questions about the Gnome Software application's role in
the workstation product?
I don't think it does, no. I'm a Red Hat employee, a Fedora user, but
also a
On Sun, Dec 28, 2014 at 8:28 PM, Stephen John Smoogen smo...@gmail.com wrote:
On 28 December 2014 at 17:32, Ralf Corsepius rc040...@freenet.de wrote:
On 12/29/2014 12:58 AM, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
On Sun, Dec 28, 2014 at 2:42 PM, Alec Leamas leamas.a...@gmail.com
wrote:
Hm...
2014-12-29 19:25 GMT+02:00 Chris Murphy li...@colorremedies.com:
From 1984 to 2001 there was a rather popular platform that didn't have
a CLI. It wasn't hidden, it simply didn't exist.
I take it you are referring to OS/2. It did have a cmd.exe.
--
devel mailing list
On Mon, Dec 29, 2014 at 11:22 AM, Alexander Ploumistos
alex.ploumis...@gmail.com wrote:
2014-12-29 19:25 GMT+02:00 Chris Murphy li...@colorremedies.com:
From 1984 to 2001 there was a rather popular platform that didn't have
a CLI. It wasn't hidden, it simply didn't exist.
I take it you are
Am 29.12.2014 um 19:39 schrieb Chris Murphy:
On Mon, Dec 29, 2014 at 11:22 AM, Alexander Ploumistos
alex.ploumis...@gmail.com wrote:
2014-12-29 19:25 GMT+02:00 Chris Murphy li...@colorremedies.com:
From 1984 to 2001 there was a rather popular platform that didn't have
a CLI. It wasn't
2014-12-29 20:39 GMT+02:00 Chris Murphy li...@colorremedies.com:
Nope. Vastly more popular than OS/2.
OK, yes, my Macintosh Classic didn't have a cli. But the Macs back then
were much like feature phones are today. You got basic functionality in the
standard package with the very beautiful UI
Am Mon, 29 Dec 2014 18:47:33 +
schrieb devel-requ...@lists.fedoraproject.org:
Message: 5
Date: Mon, 29 Dec 2014 15:18:04 +
From: Richard Hughes hughsi...@gmail.com
To: Development discussions related to Fedora
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Subject: Re: Ramblings and questions
On Mon, Dec 29, 2014 at 12:52 PM, Alexander Ploumistos
alex.ploumis...@gmail.com wrote:
2014-12-29 20:39 GMT+02:00 Chris Murphy li...@colorremedies.com:
Nope. Vastly more popular than OS/2.
OK, yes, my Macintosh Classic didn't have a cli. But the Macs back then were
much like feature phones
Am 29.12.2014 um 22:01 schrieb Chris Murphy:
The real developers are those who are actively getting things done,
and are not defined by what interface they're using.
yes, and that's why the real developers need to get aware of *all*
capabilities of their operating system and not got hidden
On 27 December 2014 at 21:53, Adam Williamson
adamw...@fedoraproject.org wrote:
On Sat, 2014-12-27 at 15:57 +0200, Alexander Ploumistos wrote:
Actually we do have a VLTS (Very Long Term Support) release, CentOS,
especially now that they've joined the family, but the connection is
not
2014-12-29 23:01 GMT+02:00 Chris Murphy li...@colorremedies.com:
OK, yes, my Macintosh Classic didn't have a cli. But the Macs back then
were
much like feature phones are today.
This is beside the point. However, even if feature phones had an
installable developer tools do you think you'd
Hi
On Mon, Dec 29, 2014 at 7:36 PM, Ian Malone wrote:
Minor correction, CentOS is unbranded RHEL and Fedora is not RHEL
upstream (so far as I am aware anyway).
That is incorrect. Fedora is upstream for RHEL and therefore upstream for
CentOS as well albeit, one step removed.
Rahul
--
On Mon, Dec 29, 2014 at 8:26 PM, Rahul Sundaram methe...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi
On Mon, Dec 29, 2014 at 7:36 PM, Ian Malone wrote:
Minor correction, CentOS is unbranded RHEL and Fedora is not RHEL
upstream (so far as I am aware anyway).
That is incorrect. Fedora is upstream for RHEL and
On Mon, Dec 29, 2014 at 5:58 PM, Alexander Ploumistos
alex.ploumis...@gmail.com wrote:
What does the CLI-less-ness of Macs and their gazillion dollar industry have
to do with the rest of this discussion though?
None really. I was just pushing back against the idea platform CLIness
has anything
On 27 December 2014 at 23:17, Reindl Harald h.rei...@thelounge.net wrote:
having choices and options is the reason why people switch to Linux,
http://www.islinuxaboutchoice.com/
Richard
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
1 - 100 of 131 matches
Mail list logo
