Tweet
Now that Fedora and SUSE are doing web-based installer, I don't see much noise from the usual suspects. Either nobody cares about Fedora/SUSE or people are just plain butthurt by the success Ubuntu enjoys
-
-
mainly because the Fedora/SUSE web-based installer is just a frontend talking to an API (and other things can leverage this API too like Cockpit or a VM hypervisor), so it's actually a sensible decision, didn't you see the comments under the other article?Originally posted by om26er View PostComment
-
Listen to yourself. Ubuntu was also going to do the same thing, using a Web technology based front-end that talks to the backend probably over Unix Domain Socket. Just like Flutter based front-end today would talk to subiquity (albiet something other than UDS)Originally posted by starshipeleven View PostComment
-
what Ubuntu has done eventually, a bunch of years later is kind of irrelevant for people discussing this in 2018. Nobody knew the futureOriginally posted by om26er View Post
The article (and Mark Shuttleworth original discussion it's based on) was not talking about any of that architecture, compare with the article about Fedora/SUSE doing this, and clearly talking about separation and independent APIs and all that.Comment
-
The architecture of ubiquity today is also like that, there is a backend code AND there is a front-end. KDE has it's own front-end (based on QT) and ubuntu has it's own (based on GTK+). So it was very clear in 2018 what Mark was talking about. i.e. writing a new front-end based on Web technologies, however I'll admit they have probably wanted to use their server installer's backend called subiquity to ditch the old ubiquityOriginally posted by starshipeleven View Post
Comment
Comment