| 1 |
On Fri, 2007-12-28 at 05:53 +0000, Steve Long wrote: |
| 2 |
> Chris Gianelloni wrote: |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> >> branding: Enable Gentoo specific branding |
| 5 |
> >> [questionable, as used for splashes/shortcuts/artwork] |
| 6 |
> > |
| 7 |
> > Well, my personal opinion here is that we should enable this by default |
| 8 |
> > on *at least* the desktop profiles, as providing sensible defaults and |
| 9 |
> > branding isn't outside the scope of the project. We still stay as close |
| 10 |
> > to upstream as possible with this stuff and only use it for branding or |
| 11 |
> > optional Gentoo-specific minor config changes. Also, it can still be |
| 12 |
> > disabled for people who want everything as upstream intended. |
| 13 |
> > |
| 14 |
> I have no objection to it being flagged on by default in desktop profiles, |
| 15 |
> but "Gentoo-specific minor config changes" concerns me, since I take it as |
| 16 |
> given that installing for a specific distro implies config changes to work |
| 17 |
> with that distro, and not having those because I have turned branding off |
| 18 |
> sounds bad for me as a user and seems a confusion of purpose. (It could |
| 19 |
> lead to more optional config changes bundled in future which wouldn't be |
| 20 |
> apparent without knowledge of the ebuild.) |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
Well, by this I meant something like bug #170059 which would mean |
| 23 |
changing the default home page (minor config change) to something |
| 24 |
Gentoo-specific. Not all config changes are for required functionality. |
| 25 |
Sorry, I had assumed that people on this list would be technical and |
| 26 |
able to realize this without it being explicitly spelled-out. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
-- |
| 29 |
Chris Gianelloni |
| 30 |
Release Engineering Strategic Lead |
| 31 |
Alpha/AMD64/x86 Architecture Teams |
| 32 |
Games Developer/Foundation Trustee |
| 33 |
Gentoo Foundation |
Archives