> In Fedora 22, we will be producing four network install ISOs: > * Fedora Server > - Server branding > - Default environment group: Fedora Server > - Auto-partitioning defaults: LVM on XFS (except /boot) > - Responsible WG: Server WG > * Fedora Workstation > - Workstation branding > - Default environment group: Fedora Workstation > - Auto-partitioning defaults: LVM on EXT4 > - Responsible WG: Workstation WG > * Fedora Cloud > - Cloud branding > - Default environment group: Fedora Cloud > - Auto-partitioning defaults: TBD > - Responsible WG: Cloud WG > * Fedora "Generic" (name TBD) > - Generic Fedora branding > - Default environment group: minimal > - Auto-partitioning defaults: TBD > - Responsible WG: Base WG
I have missed that discussion, so if it has been decided already, I'm late. But my feeling is that we're going to shoot ourselves in the foot with this. Our QA test matrices will explode once again, and we will be offering too many images with almost indistinguishable differences to our users. The only difference seems to be branding (which can be generic) and partitioning scheme. People installing Server and Cloud are usually pretty capable of choosing their preferred partitioning scheme. I think this is not worth 3 more netinst images. But I guess most of my objection is caused by the QA point of view. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
