Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Fedora 20 Moves Ahead With Wayland Tech Preview

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    The next couple of months should be very interesting Wayland-wise. I'm hoping for Wayland-compatible NVIDIA drivers and/or a major browser getting stable GTK3 support.

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by danielnez1 View Post
      May years ago, I upgraded Ubuntu on my Mum's netbook and the whole thing was completely hosed on the first boot after the upgrade. Regardless of the OS, there is always the risk that a OS upgrade can go awry in some way. also, needing to upgrade to new versions frequently can be disruptive especially if software extensions break etc.
      I'm aware of such problems. However, an OS that comes for free is almost mandated to have poorer support in this regard. If you really need an older version to be supported for years, there are lots of paid distributions.
      There are ways to avoid some breakages, too.
      On extensions, then you lose the point of security. If the extension is still supported, they should port it to newer versions of software. If it isn't, then chances are you are already running an unsafe environment.

      My case is not paradoxical either, I'm just saying that Red Hat are not "squeaky clean" when it comes to CLAs and unless a free software licence prevents CLAs, anyone is free to introduce their own.
      I didn't imply yours was paradoxical, I just thought you were referring to all of the Canonical's CLA decliners. I'm against any kind of asymmetrical CLA.

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by Ericg View Post
        He's trolling, or at minimum flamebaiting, if he blatantly says "This sucks." And nothing else (Read some of his other recent posts theyre all flamebait waiting to catch fire).
        Maybe he didn't get pass the installer... I know I almost gave up and I'm no spring chicken when it comes to linux.

        Originally posted by Ericg View Post
        Installer fragile? Yes, granted. Better than in 18 though, and 20 I heard is supposed to have a few more changes to tweak it a bit. (Personally I wish they would've adopted Ubuntu's ubiquity and just modified it to suit their purposes... Installer is one thing Ubuntu got really right)
        I grant you it's better than 18. But that much was to be expected. I was hoping for it to just work right about now.

        Originally posted by Ericg View Post
        Network Manager... Not sure about your issues with static IP and the WPA hotspot (mine work fine, maybe some weird hardware incompatibility?) Firewall..I honestly dont even turn it on so I can't comment. If you were talking about bridging and more Virtual Machine stuff like that, thats all coming in Fedora 20. Upstream NM didn't have support for it before, now they do.
        Weird hardware incompatibility is always a possibility. Then again it just works with hostapd.
        The static IP problem got fixed in a week after release but that was a week I spent looking at a packet analyzer so color me unimpressed...
        As for firewall, I think it's on by default but if you taken it off I applaud your bravado. Sadly, I've been subscribing to zero day release mail groups for a few years now so I've grown somewhat cowardly myself seeing all those "zero-day" announcements turn up after 3 month in the wild...
        As for the rest of the NetworkManager's stuff (the bridging and the VM), I've been patiently waiting for it to work the-very-next-release since 2004 It alone is the reason why when someone seems to flame-bait\troll Fedora, I can't help sympathize.

        Originally posted by Ericg View Post
        Fedora 20 is gonna niiiiiiiiice. KDE 4.11, Kernel 3.11, Gnome 3.10, Wayland, and E17... Just...Yes XD
        I'm trying not to be overly optimistic but I too have very high hopes for Fedora 20. It's really looking like everything will finally be falling into place... systemd is ready... Pulseaudio been ready for a while... The GUI kits are nearly Wayland ready... The WMs and DEs should be a few months away from just working after the release happens... The best part is I haven't seen any new design mock-ups for some time now. Neither Gnome, KDE nor even E17 devs are drawing years worth of eye-candy-breakage on paper napkins. Even Mozilla, which needs to update their Firefox's XUL backend for Wayland, haven't brought up another redesign...
        So yeah, hopefully good and not too exciting times

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by danielnez1 View Post
          Isnít that a little paradoxical since Red Hat have used CLAs before?
          Fedora's CLA does not allow Red Hat to close up the source code of your contributions, while Ubuntu's CLA explicitly states so, in section 2.3.

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by mrugiero View Post
            I'm aware of such problems. However, an OS that comes for free is almost mandated to have poorer support in this regard. If you really need an older version to be supported for years, there are lots of paid distributions.
            There are ways to avoid some breakages, too.
            On extensions, then you lose the point of security. If the extension is still supported, they should port it to newer versions of software. If it isn't, then chances are you are already running an unsafe environment.
            However, if a new version of the extension has a major UI change etc. then the user will have to re-lean how to use it. That can be extremely problematic. However, as Red Hat already do with RHEL, security updates can be backported to older versions of software without significant, or if any changes to how the program works.

            There are a number of free distros/services that provide longer support i.e. CentOS, openSUSE Evergreen and even Ubuntu/Mint LTS - I'd say they are far better choices for less technical users than Fedora.

            Originally posted by mrugiero View Post
            I didn't imply yours was paradoxical, I just thought you were referring to all of the Canonical's CLA decliners. I'm against any kind of asymmetrical CLA.
            My apologies.

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by c117152 View Post
              -- It's really looking like everything will finally be falling into place -- So yeah, hopefully good and not too exciting times
              Exactly. Starting from 2014, I would hope for things to stabilize for a few years. But I'm afraid that won't be the case

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by r1348 View Post
                Fedora's CLA does not allow Red Hat to close up the source code of your contributions, while Ubuntu's CLA explicitly states so, in section 2.3.
                My point is that at the end of the day, it is still a CLA, just because they are no longer flavour of the month at Red Hat right now, there is nothing stopping them from introducing them again in the future.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by danielnez1 View Post
                  My point is that at the end of the day, it is still a CLA, just because they are no longer flavour of the month at Red Hat right now, there is nothing stopping them from introducing them again in the future.
                  That is not true as I have pointed out before. Even if you accept a single outside contribution to the project, you cannot unilaterally introduce a CLA because it requires you to have all of the copyrights or a very broad sub licensing ability. Either it has to be introduced in the very beginning of the project or not at all. So NONE of the existing projects maintained without a CLA, for ex: systemd can do so at a later stage.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by r1348 View Post
                    Fedora's CLA does not allow Red Hat to close up the source code of your contributions, while Ubuntu's CLA explicitly states so, in section 2.3.
                    Yeah but your contributions remain open source and you still maintain copyright. I'm not sure, in practice, that there is anything evil there.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by c117152 View Post
                      and the firewall...
                      You dont like firewall-cmd ?


                      All aside, as a Redhat/fedora user for 15 years now (!!), it makes me happy to see that Fedora will roll out wayland in a sane manner. Hopefully ATI / Nvidia will work with RedHat to test their drivers on EGL as well.
                      Last edited by xtachx; 09-10-2013, 12:28 AM.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by johnc View Post
                        Yeah but your contributions remain open source and you still maintain copyright. I'm not sure, in practice, that there is anything evil there.
                        I wouldn't call it evil since we are talking about technology and not moral choices. Canonical CLA creates a asymmetrical licensing situation and unlevel playing field that has been explained in detail at http://mjg59.dreamwidth.org/25376.html

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Originally posted by RahulSundaram View Post
                          I wouldn't call it evil since we are talking about technology and not moral choices. Canonical CLA creates a asymmetrical licensing situation and unlevel playing field that has been explained in detail at http://mjg59.dreamwidth.org/25376.html
                          Yeah the GPLv3 license for Mir is definitely it's biggest weakness from my perspective, vs. the other display servers out there.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Originally posted by Ericg View Post
                            Installer fragile? Yes, granted. Better than in 18 though, and 20 I heard is supposed to have a few more changes to tweak it a bit. (Personally I wish they would've adopted Ubuntu's ubiquity and just modified it to suit their purposes... Installer is one thing Ubuntu got really right)
                            I wish people would stop saying this, because it's never going to happen. Ubiquity is quite a nice very simple OS installer. We can't use it for Fedora because Fedora needs to have a much more complex and capable installer. Fedora's intended user base requires (and has come to expect, based on previous releases) far more functionality than ubiquity provides. Where anaconda is more fragile or complex than ubiquity, it is so directly as a result of the need for additional functionality. If we could just drop half of anaconda's functionality, we could make it a lot simpler, but we can't. Anaconda is not appropriate for Ubuntu, and Ubiquity is not appropriate for Fedora. Sorry, folks.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              I will try Fedora 20 for sure.
                              Step 1: install Fedora 20.
                              Step 2: log-in wayland world!!
                              Step 3: play and report bug

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Originally posted by RahulSundaram View Post
                                That is not true as I have pointed out before. Even if you accept a single outside contribution to the project, you cannot unilaterally introduce a CLA because it requires you to have all of the copyrights or a very broad sub licensing ability. Either it has to be introduced in the very beginning of the project or not at all. So NONE of the existing projects maintained without a CLA, for ex: systemd can do so at a later stage.
                                However, what is to stop Red Hat, or any other company/individual to introduce a new open source project (or correct me if I'm wrong relicense a BSD or MIT licensed project) with a CLA?

                                Given Red Hats use of CLAs in the past and there being no guarantee that they will never use them again, I don't think you are in a position to criticise Canonicals (I'm not a fan of them BTW) use of CLAs.
                                Last edited by danielnez1; 09-10-2013, 07:39 AM.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X