[Libosinfo] [PATCH 2/3] fedora: More correct/appr. system reqs for F19

[Zeeshan Ali (Khattak)]

On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 4:19 PM, Christophe Fergeau <cfergeau at redhat.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 03:58:46PM +0300, Zeeshan Ali (Khattak) wrote:
>> On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 8:31 AM, Christophe Fergeau <cfergeau at redhat.com> wrote:
>> > On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 05:00:50AM +0300, Zeeshan Ali (Khattak) wrote:
>> >> From: "Zeeshan Ali (Khattak)" <zeeshanak at gnome.org>
>> >>
>> >> While the minimum requirements are specified by F19 docs:
>> >>
>> >> http://fedorapeople.org/groups/docs/release-notes/en-US/sect-Release_Notes-Welcome_to_Fedora_.html#hardware_overview
>> >>
>> >> I came-up with recommended on my own by simply multiplying the minimum
>> >> requirements by 2.
>> >
>> > Was there a significant difference when using these recommended values
>> > rather than the minimum ones? I'm trying to figure out where this patch is
>> > coming from/why it's needed.
>>
>> The docs (linked above) say: "The figures below are a recommended
>> minimum for the default installation. Your requirements may differ,
>> and most applications will benefit from more than the minimum
>> resources." and as I said in the log, I just came-up with them on my
>> own. Feel free to suggest different/better values.
>
> Yup, I've seen that quote, but this is awfully unspecific. I'd tend to
> just have the minimum values in libosinfo unless you observed significant
> improvements with your recommended values.

I think we should specify some sane recommended values. There is a
reason why minimum and recommended are kept separate. The doc might be
vague but one thing is clear from it: Better have more resources than
these minimum ones if possible.

-- 
Regards,

Zeeshan Ali (Khattak)
FSF member#5124