[CentOS-devel] What name would be acceptable for Desktop version of CentOS?

Sun Jan 22 23:02:33 UTC 2012
Leon Fauster <leonfauster at googlemail.com>

Am 20.01.2012 um 19:56 schrieb Ljubomir Ljubojevic:
> On 01/20/2012 07:37 PM, Les Mikesell wrote:
>> On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 12:24 PM, Ljubomir Ljubojevic<office at plnet.rs>  wrote:
>>> I would like to stay as close as possible to CentOS name, because it
>>> practically is CentOS, with third-party repositories enabled. Intention
>>> is to provide easily installable packages from various repositories, but
>>> I have no desire to make it into developing distro, just a bunch of
>>> carefully chosen and above all as stable as possible packages sitting on
>>> top of the CentOS (with as little as possible replaced packages) that
>>> will attract Desktop users wanting stability above all, but not
>>> knowledgeable enough to decide what package from what repository they
>>> are to chose.
>> Why bother spinning an install for that?  A repository-release file
>> and list of packages or group for yum should work on top of a standard
>> install.   I've always thought there should be some standard/easy way
>> for anyone to publish a set suitable for some particular use, but I
>> don't think it really exists.
> The problem is that regular CentOS .repo files, and .repo files of all 
> third-party repositories have no concept of "priorities", so what must 
> be done is to totally replace all .repo files, and I do not feel 
> comfortable with calling such a move a minor one. Also, At least on 
> repository must be more important then stock CentOS repositories, so 
> overrides can be done.

what do you think about a (meta) package? that provides "all" desktop-like add-ons.
a rpm with "prioritized" repo files (3rd), post scripts to patch exiting base repo files,
defined requires that force installation of additional "desktop" rpms (e.g. audio codecs)
and so on (i known that the codec dependency can't be resolved if the repo files are not 
installed) ... would this address all your "desktop" needs? Or are there any packages 
that are not in one 3rd party software repository?

anyway - i like the core idea of a desktop version but what distinguish that one from 
the upstream client / workstation version (beside any 3rd party software repository).