rpmfusion based spin

[Stewart Adam]

On Tue, 2008-08-26 at 07:09 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I have been keep a tab on rpmfusion progress by reading the archives and 
>   it seems the repository is getting reading for launch soon. Congrats 
> on that.
> 
> My primary interest here at the moment is creating a spin based on 
> rpmfusion and Fedora which  Thorsten Leemhuis mentioned as desirable in 
> one of his earlier mails to this list.
> 
> So before I put in some effort, a few questions:
> 
>   * Is this seen as a worthwhile effort by rpmfusion contributors?

Definitely! Lack of media codecs, etc is (as far as I know) the most
common user complaint about Fedora. This would be great and make it
easy newcomers to Linux to get stated with Fedora (minus the Fedora
logos ;) ).

>   * My primary effort would be around a live cd based on the desktop 
> live cd from Fedora but I would like to hear your thoughts on other 
> variants as well.

That sounds fine - I think maybe a DVD spin with all the rpmfusion
packages would be useful as well for offline installs.

This is thinking way ahead, but while we're on the topic of spins do you
think it's fair to say we should respin once every 2-3 months? That
means we could have (roughly) the gold release + 2 respins along the way
per release of Fedora. Until DRPM support gets into the build infra, I
think this would be a good thing to do since another really annoying
thing for users is having to wait 4 hours for a large DVD iso to
download, then after installing they find they need some 150 updates! 

>   * What should the package content be? Should both rpmfusion-free and 
> rpmfusion-nonfree repository installed by default? What are the 
> important packages you want to see included? Keep in mind that in the 
> live cd atleast, we would have to drop some existing packages to 
> accommodate new ones.

Just to be on the safe(r?) legal side, maybe we should preinstall
packages from only rpmfusion-free but have the rpmfusion-nonfree repo
enabled.

>   * What do you want to call the spin as? My idea was that the spin name 
> should be different the repository name to avoid confusion and unique 
> identify what we are talking about easily. Does freefusion sound good?

freefusion sounds good, but I think the name might be a bit misleading
if we enable or preinstall nonfree packages, or users might ask about a
"nonfreefusion" spin.

> Any other feedback is welcome as well. Finally, it would also be useful 
> I can get some hosting space to upload content as we test the spins. 
> Thanks.
> 
> Rahul

Stewart