[Libosinfo] Fwd: [PATCH 4/4] gnome: Add info about 3.10

[Christophe Fergeau]

On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 03:17:43PM +0300, Zeeshan Ali (Khattak) wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 12:31 PM, Christophe Fergeau
> <cfergeau at redhat.com> wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 11, 2013 at 06:43:58PM +0300, Zeeshan Ali (Khattak) wrote:
> >> On Wed, Sep 11, 2013 at 5:52 PM, Christophe Fergeau
> >> <cfergeau at redhat.com> wrote:
> >> > You are missing my point, I'm saying that ostree based images are
> >> > very
> >> > different from the GNOME live CDs that are already listed in
> >> > libosinfo
> >> > database,
> >>
> >> And that is simply not true. They are both GNOME. The fact that <=3.8
> >> media were based on fedora was an implementation detail that is pretty
> >> irrelevant. They are both still the same OS.
> >
> > From a user point of view, this could be the way the GNOME project
> > wants to
> > market these images. From a libosinfo internal representation point of
> > view, I think this 'implementation detail' is significant enough for us
> > to
> > represent them differently. Different base OS can also mean differences
> > in
> > hardware supported by the image.
> >
> > The live cd and these ostree images are very different things, let's
> > represent them _internally_ as different OSes (note that I haven't said
> > anything about the user-visible OS names).
>-
> If you read my previous mail more thoroughly, I already explained how
> we can deal with this difference when such a difference realizes (i-e
> *if* there is a fedora-based gnome iso again for some reason)
> *without* breaking anything what so ever.

What do we do when the GNOME project starts releasing GNOME OS
installer ISOs if they happen not to be based on ostree for some reason?
Wouldn't we want to use the http://gnome.org/3.10 id for that rather than
having something else use that?

> So your whole point is now
> mute as I already made changes to my patches that do take this
> difference in account as much as it needs to be right now.

My initial point still stands, it's just weird to have http://gnome.org/3.6
be a fedora-based live cd, http://gnome.org/3.8 be a fedora-based live cd,
and then have http://gnome.org/3.10 become something ostree based, and
hypothetical future fedora-based live cds become
http://gnome.org/something/3.10.

As the GNOME project for now tends to use different projects as a basis for
its ISOs/images, let's keep everything nicely separated as this is more
future-proof imo:
http://gnome.org/ostree/3.10 for these ostree images
http://gnome.org/live/3.10 if there are fedora-based live cds again

Christophe
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/libosinfo/attachments/20130912/382d41e9/attachment.sig>