FESCo meeting summary for 2009-06-26

[Kevin Kofler]

Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> The constructiveness if for KDE SIG and individuals to accept that his
> claim of "perfect integration" is silly when there are many gaps to
> address.

Those gaps are not integration issues. They're just features which GNOME
happens to have.

> I have no problems with that except for the concern that users who are
> completely new to Linux don't understand jargon like GNOME or KDE. It 
> means nothing and I think download page isn't going to the right place
> to do it. I would like to see a good proposal, perhaps a mockup showing
> us how it can be done instead of voting in FESCo.

Just link to an info page for each.

> Why single out desktop environments? Is the justifications for all of
> our defaults documented anywhere? Shouldn't it be?

Default apps are basically implied by the desktop environment (we ship apps
designed for the respective spin's desktop environment).

> I think, the amount of resources within Fedora directed at one desktop
> environment is a big factor and it does make a significant difference in
> the end user experience when new technologies developed within Fedora.

And I think the amount of resources directed towards KDE is sufficient
(though as I wrote repeatedly, more help would be perfectly welcome).

>> And, the answers to these questions will only get more important over
>> time, it seems, as more and more viable alternatives arise (within
>> Fedora), like sugar, XFCE, LXDE, etc...
> 
> .. and this makes it even more important to make the right decision.
> Would it be right to provide a long list of desktop environments and
> live cd's associated within the download page or upfront within the
> installer?

Yes.

> How do you even describe the differences appropriately?

Just link to info pages.

        Kevin Kofler