My 2 cents on the whole Fedora to succeed as global wide deployed desktop are...

[Martin Sourada]

On Mon, 2007-09-03 at 21:00 +0200, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> The user will always have the choice. The question is only whether a 
> list of all possible services make sense to ask in the installer. IMO, 
> this is the distribution's responsibility. For cpuspeed, enable it by 
> default if the hardware is capable. If the hardware is not capable, 
> cpuspeed disables itself on start.
> 
> Rahul
> 
Yes, it is distribution's responsibility, but the goal here is to make
the boot process more effective. That means point out services we don't
need and remove them from default configuration. If we can do this
process fully automatic and dependant on hardware, than I am all for it
not being in anaconda or first boot. If not, give user basic, easy
choice of default configuration, either of which will NOT break a
system, the set of enabled/disabled services would be chosen by
distribution. 

Another thing is system-config-services. Do we want users to use it? If
yes then we need to make it as much as possible fool-proof. That
basically means that we should give sane names there and not just name
of the services - everyone knows what bluetooth means, not anyone knows
what cups is. Sometimes description is enough, sometimes the description
is misleading, hard to understand.

Martin
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/attachments/20070903/63b852d3/attachment.sig>