[Libosinfo] Fwd: [PATCH 4/4] gnome: Add info about 3.10

[Zeeshan Ali (Khattak)]

Oh great, hit reply instead of reply-all by mistake. Sorry for that.


---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Zeeshan Ali (Khattak) <zeeshanak at gnome.org>
Date: Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 3:17 PM
Subject: Re: [Libosinfo] [PATCH 4/4] gnome: Add info about 3.10
To: Christophe Fergeau <cfergeau at redhat.com>


On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 12:31 PM, Christophe Fergeau
<cfergeau at redhat.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 11, 2013 at 06:43:58PM +0300, Zeeshan Ali (Khattak) wrote:
>> On Wed, Sep 11, 2013 at 5:52 PM, Christophe Fergeau <cfergeau at redhat.com> wrote:
>> > You are missing my point, I'm saying that ostree based images are very
>> > different from the GNOME live CDs that are already listed in libosinfo
>> > database,
>>
>> And that is simply not true. They are both GNOME. The fact that <=3.8
>> media were based on fedora was an implementation detail that is pretty
>> irrelevant. They are both still the same OS.
>
> From a user point of view, this could be the way the GNOME project wants to
> market these images. From a libosinfo internal representation point of
> view, I think this 'implementation detail' is significant enough for us to
> represent them differently. Different base OS can also mean differences in
> hardware supported by the image.
>
> The live cd and these ostree images are very different things, let's
> represent them _internally_ as different OSes (note that I haven't said
> anything about the user-visible OS names).

If you read my previous mail more thoroughly, I already explained how
we can deal with this difference when such a difference realizes (i-e
*if* there is a fedora-based gnome iso again for some reason)
*without* breaking anything what so ever. So your whole point is now
mute as I already made changes to my patches that do take this
difference in account as much as it needs to be right now.

--
Regards,

Zeeshan Ali (Khattak)
FSF member#5124


-- 
Regards,

Zeeshan Ali (Khattak)
FSF member#5124