Unfortunately, Mukt completely mis-reported this and Slashdot picked up their errors for the summary, which is making for a lot of confusion.
tl;dr:
1. blivet-gui isn't supposed to (and in fact cannot) 'replace' gparted in any reasonable sense of that term. 2. blivet-gui is a new application, but its backend is the Fedora installer's storage management code, which is a very old codebase. There is no new storage management backend being written here. 3. Lennart and systemd have nothing at all to do with this. 4. It wouldn't really be practical to 'contribute' this to gparted, as it would involve completely ripping and replacing gparted's backend and then very rapidly proposing significant changes to the GUI, and hence would be a project takeover by any other name. 5. blivet uses standard underlying tools for performing operations, it's just a logic/configuration layer for them.
1: what the original announcement says is that blivet-gui uses a gparted-like UI to make it instantly familiar for gparted users. It doesn't say anything at all about it 'replacing' gparted. That's a pure invention (likely based on a misunderstanding) in the Mukt article. See the original announcement at https://lists.fedoraproject.or... to verify this, if you like. There's no sense in which blivet-gui really *could* "replace" gparted, if you think about it. gparted is an independent project; Red Hat doesn't own or maintain it, so Red Hat can't stop it existing or being maintained. gparted isn't a significant component for either RHEL or Fedora: it's just a leaf package, an app like any other. It's not like anaconda uses gparted as its partitioning tool, or anything like that. So talking about blivet-gui 'replacing' gparted doesn't make any sense, not upstream, not downstream. So long as upstream gparted devs see a need to keep developing gparted, gparted will continue to exist upstream, and so long as a Fedora packager wants gparted to be in Fedora, it'll be in Fedora, whether or not blivet-gui or any *other* storage management GUI app is also in Fedora. We have lots of space in the repos.
2: the backend for blivet-gui is blivet: https://git.fedorahosted.org/g... (packaged in Fedora as python-blivet). This codebase is simply the storage management backend of anaconda (the Fedora installer) split out into its own repository. The split happened back in 2012: http://www.redhat.com/archives... . The intent was to allow for exactly this kind of code re-use. So there really isn't some kind of new NIH effort going on here: the storage management code is not new, all that's new is the light wrapper around blivet to produce a standalone GUI app rather than using it as a part of the anaconda installer. The underlying codebase has existed basically as long as anaconda has existed, which is rather longer than gparted has existed. anaconda dates back to 1999 (https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/History_of_Red_Hat_Linux ), gparted AFAICT dates back to 2004 (http://gparted.org/news.php?item=180 ).
3: Doesn't really need expanding on, but no, there is absolutely zero link to Lennart, systemd, or any other systemd developers.
4: so the reason to do blivet-gui at all, and the reason anaconda doesn't just call gparted for "partitioning" like ubiquity does, is it doesn't cover anywhere near the functionality we actually need for the Fedora (and, more to the point, RHEL) installer. gparted really is a *partitioning* tool, and there's a reason I keep referring to blivet as "storage management". It handles things that aren't just partitions. The most obvious examples are mdraid, LVM, and btrfs (insofar as btrfs acts as a volume management and redundancy system, not just as a simple filesystem like ext), but blivet has all sorts of other interesting capabilities too, primarily of interest t
"We transferred the case to this court on our own motion. [FN3] We now conclude that the answer to the reported question is, "Yes, where the defendant's compelled decryption would not communicate facts of a testimonial nature to the Commonwealth beyond what the defendant already had admitted to investigators.""
So: don't admit the disks are yours, don't admit you know they're encrypted, don't admit you can decrypt them. (Of course, "don't say anything at all", the old standby, covers all of those, thus once more proving its value.)
Adam's Law of British Technology Self-Publicists: if the name "Sharkey" is attached, be suspicious. If the name "Warwick" is attached, be very suspicious. If both "Sharkey" and "Warwick" are attached, run like hell.
yeah, it may be worth adding a note about that on the download page...but one of the things that'll be done as part of fedora.next is a complete revamp of that site area, so i'll wait till that's in planning to suggest the idea. thanks.
It's not just about the install image, it's actually about building useful stuff into each product (and also allowing the same things to be configured in different ways in the different products, which is another part of why they can't just be package sets). For instance, the 'role' management for Server: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki....
That's what the *live* installer does - because that's all a live installer can do, really, unless you make a live image with a DVD-size package repository, which not many people really seem to want.
The *non live* installer still lets you choose the deployed package set.
The three product approach isn't simply about the deployed package set, though. It involves really rather a lot more than that. Hard to go into details in a Slashdot comment, but see https://fedoraproject.org/wiki....
Disclaimer: I work for RH, but I have nothing at all to do with any of this stuff (I work on Fedora).
AFAICS, the WSJ alleges #2, but we are very clearly stating that WSJ is wrong and it's just #1 (we'll support your RHEL install no matter what you have running on top of it, just like we always have, we just won't support the OpenStack bit if it's not RH OpenStack, or whatever the hell we call it, I don't know.)
"How many of us liked shop? How many young people should be training for skilled manufacturing and service jobs rather than getting history or political science degrees?"
I don't know, perhaps you could ask someone who could give you an answer based on prior experience - like an economic historian?
Wow, it's always a tough competition, but this may win "Ridiculous Slashdot Headline Of The Week".
Logic 101, folks. Let's recap that headline:
"TCP/IP Might Have Been Secure From the Start If Not For the NSA"
Now, what's the story here? One of TCP/IP's designers had access to some then-bleeding-edge crypto *that was part of an NSA project*, but couldn't include it in TCP/IP because it was secret.
Now, can we support the idea that "if not for the NSA" that crypto could have gone into TCP/IP? No, because "if not for the NSA" that crypto *wouldn't have fucking existed at all*. The NSA wrote it. So the choices are "code written, but not available for use" or "code not written at all". Practical difference for the purposes of TCP/IP: zip.
He contributed to the campaign for Proposition 8. The text of Proposition 8 was this:
"Sec. 7.5. Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California."
The state of affairs prior to Prop 8 was that the state supreme court had determined that marriage between two partners of the same sex was valid and recognized in California. Thus Prop 8 was, very clearly, precisely and inarguably, a measure that specifically abolished marriage for people of the same-sex.
Marriage is not a right, no. But the right not to be discriminated against by the state *is* a right.
No-one has a right to demand that the state (federal government, state government) be in the business of defining marriage and granting particular privileges to people it considers to be 'married' at all. It wouldn't be a violation of anyone's constitutional rights if the federal government, or a particular state government, just got out of the business of marriage entirely.
But as long as governments choose to recognize a state called 'marriage' and grant particular benefits to people they consider to be 'married', people absolutely *do* have a right for that to be implemented in a non-discriminatory way.
It has been pointed out in other sub-threads, but not this one: this is not a question of personal beliefs, but financial support of active legal discrimination.
"I think it's wrong for two people of the same sex to get married" is a personal belief. Contributing to a campaign to pass a law to have that belief enforced by the state is not a personal belief.
"Look for real companies designing and building real products for proper customers."
Specifically, if you're an older programmer, look for very large companies with very old products that are so mission-critical they cannot be redeveloped. Or find a good recruiter who does.
My father spent the last ten years or so of his career contracting out at obscene per-hour rates to shops which needed people who could write COBOL to maintain silly little things like, you know, nuclear power plants and the back ends for national banks. Not *important* stuff like apps for ordering coffee, but it pays a living.
He was still getting pleading emails from recruiters two years after he retired.
Canada produces plenty of copyrighted works, sure. We don't exactly *export* a lot of them, though. I'm not sure how much demand there is in South Korea for episodes of Trailer Park Boys, Murdoch Mysteries or Corner Gas, and those are some of Canadian TV's success stories.:)
Compare and contrast with the other AC whining about evolution below.
When you're being accused by nutters from both sides of being biased towards the other side, I'd say you're doing a reasonable job of being neutral. See also: the BBC.
Slashdot Mirror
If you look at a screenshot of blivet-gui, you'll see it doesn't use the same UI as anaconda.
Unfortunately, Mukt completely mis-reported this and Slashdot picked up their errors for the summary, which is making for a lot of confusion.
tl;dr:
1. blivet-gui isn't supposed to (and in fact cannot) 'replace' gparted in any reasonable sense of that term.
2. blivet-gui is a new application, but its backend is the Fedora installer's storage management code, which is a very old codebase. There is no new storage management backend being written here.
3. Lennart and systemd have nothing at all to do with this.
4. It wouldn't really be practical to 'contribute' this to gparted, as it would involve completely ripping and replacing gparted's backend and then very rapidly proposing significant changes to the GUI, and hence would be a project takeover by any other name.
5. blivet uses standard underlying tools for performing operations, it's just a logic/configuration layer for them.
1: what the original announcement says is that blivet-gui uses a gparted-like UI to make it instantly familiar for gparted users. It doesn't say anything at all about it 'replacing' gparted. That's a pure invention (likely based on a misunderstanding) in the Mukt article. See the original announcement at https://lists.fedoraproject.or... to verify this, if you like. There's no sense in which blivet-gui really *could* "replace" gparted, if you think about it. gparted is an independent project; Red Hat doesn't own or maintain it, so Red Hat can't stop it existing or being maintained. gparted isn't a significant component for either RHEL or Fedora: it's just a leaf package, an app like any other. It's not like anaconda uses gparted as its partitioning tool, or anything like that. So talking about blivet-gui 'replacing' gparted doesn't make any sense, not upstream, not downstream. So long as upstream gparted devs see a need to keep developing gparted, gparted will continue to exist upstream, and so long as a Fedora packager wants gparted to be in Fedora, it'll be in Fedora, whether or not blivet-gui or any *other* storage management GUI app is also in Fedora. We have lots of space in the repos.
2: the backend for blivet-gui is blivet: https://git.fedorahosted.org/g... (packaged in Fedora as python-blivet). This codebase is simply the storage management backend of anaconda (the Fedora installer) split out into its own repository. The split happened back in 2012: http://www.redhat.com/archives... . The intent was to allow for exactly this kind of code re-use. So there really isn't some kind of new NIH effort going on here: the storage management code is not new, all that's new is the light wrapper around blivet to produce a standalone GUI app rather than using it as a part of the anaconda installer. The underlying codebase has existed basically as long as anaconda has existed, which is rather longer than gparted has existed. anaconda dates back to 1999 (https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/History_of_Red_Hat_Linux ), gparted AFAICT dates back to 2004 (http://gparted.org/news.php?item=180 ).
3: Doesn't really need expanding on, but no, there is absolutely zero link to Lennart, systemd, or any other systemd developers.
4: so the reason to do blivet-gui at all, and the reason anaconda doesn't just call gparted for "partitioning" like ubiquity does, is it doesn't cover anywhere near the functionality we actually need for the Fedora (and, more to the point, RHEL) installer. gparted really is a *partitioning* tool, and there's a reason I keep referring to blivet as "storage management". It handles things that aren't just partitions. The most obvious examples are mdraid, LVM, and btrfs (insofar as btrfs acts as a volume management and redundancy system, not just as a simple filesystem like ext), but blivet has all sorts of other interesting capabilities too, primarily of interest t
Yup. From the start of the ruling:
"We transferred the case to this court on our own motion. [FN3] We now conclude that the answer to the reported question is, "Yes, where the defendant's compelled decryption would not communicate facts of a testimonial nature to the Commonwealth beyond what the defendant already had admitted to investigators.""
So: don't admit the disks are yours, don't admit you know they're encrypted, don't admit you can decrypt them. (Of course, "don't say anything at all", the old standby, covers all of those, thus once more proving its value.)
"The details of the Imitation Game aren't secret, or even hard to find, and yet no one seems to reference it."
Except, well, at least four of the stories I've seen on the Turing test this week. It really doesn't seem that obscure.
"Kevin Warwick gives the bot a thumbs up"
That's a point *against*, not a point in favour.
Adam's Law of British Technology Self-Publicists: if the name "Sharkey" is attached, be suspicious. If the name "Warwick" is attached, be very suspicious. If both "Sharkey" and "Warwick" are attached, run like hell.
So, either they got attacked by someone who was able to both deface the website and *sign code with their GPG key*, or the announcement is genuine.
I think the obvious response is precisely identical in either case...
yeah, it may be worth adding a note about that on the download page...but one of the things that'll be done as part of fedora.next is a complete revamp of that site area, so i'll wait till that's in planning to suggest the idea. thanks.
It's not just about the install image, it's actually about building useful stuff into each product (and also allowing the same things to be configured in different ways in the different products, which is another part of why they can't just be package sets). For instance, the 'role' management for Server: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki... .
That's what the *live* installer does - because that's all a live installer can do, really, unless you make a live image with a DVD-size package repository, which not many people really seem to want.
The *non live* installer still lets you choose the deployed package set.
The three product approach isn't simply about the deployed package set, though. It involves really rather a lot more than that. Hard to go into details in a Slashdot comment, but see https://fedoraproject.org/wiki... .
Er...no and no? That wasn't a question about her reason for leaving, it was just a general question about Fedora's future.
Disclaimer: I work for RH, but I have nothing at all to do with any of this stuff (I work on Fedora).
AFAICS, the WSJ alleges #2, but we are very clearly stating that WSJ is wrong and it's just #1 (we'll support your RHEL install no matter what you have running on top of it, just like we always have, we just won't support the OpenStack bit if it's not RH OpenStack, or whatever the hell we call it, I don't know.)
"How many of us liked shop? How many young people should be training for skilled manufacturing and service jobs rather than getting history or political science degrees?"
I don't know, perhaps you could ask someone who could give you an answer based on prior experience - like an economic historian?
Carpenter Who Cut Off His Fingers Makes "Robohand" With 3-D Printer, Cuts Off Other Fingers With 3-D Printer
"The next time your mail goes down, should we know the name of the guy whose code flaw may have caused that?""
Two words for you: "git blame".
A leading contender for the Francis Fukuyama Award For Public Fatuousness.
Wow, it's always a tough competition, but this may win "Ridiculous Slashdot Headline Of The Week".
Logic 101, folks. Let's recap that headline:
"TCP/IP Might Have Been Secure From the Start If Not For the NSA"
Now, what's the story here? One of TCP/IP's designers had access to some then-bleeding-edge crypto *that was part of an NSA project*, but couldn't include it in TCP/IP because it was secret.
Now, can we support the idea that "if not for the NSA" that crypto could have gone into TCP/IP? No, because "if not for the NSA" that crypto *wouldn't have fucking existed at all*. The NSA wrote it. So the choices are "code written, but not available for use" or "code not written at all". Practical difference for the purposes of TCP/IP: zip.
Ah, ISWYM. Sorry, Slashdot threading always makes it tricky to figure context :/
Now I see the context, I agree with you, and nothing in the debate seems to have suggested that's his position.
He contributed to the campaign for Proposition 8. The text of Proposition 8 was this:
"Sec. 7.5. Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California."
The state of affairs prior to Prop 8 was that the state supreme court had determined that marriage between two partners of the same sex was valid and recognized in California. Thus Prop 8 was, very clearly, precisely and inarguably, a measure that specifically abolished marriage for people of the same-sex.
Marriage is not a right, no. But the right not to be discriminated against by the state *is* a right.
No-one has a right to demand that the state (federal government, state government) be in the business of defining marriage and granting particular privileges to people it considers to be 'married' at all. It wouldn't be a violation of anyone's constitutional rights if the federal government, or a particular state government, just got out of the business of marriage entirely.
But as long as governments choose to recognize a state called 'marriage' and grant particular benefits to people they consider to be 'married', people absolutely *do* have a right for that to be implemented in a non-discriminatory way.
It has been pointed out in other sub-threads, but not this one: this is not a question of personal beliefs, but financial support of active legal discrimination.
"I think it's wrong for two people of the same sex to get married" is a personal belief.
Contributing to a campaign to pass a law to have that belief enforced by the state is not a personal belief.
"Look for real companies designing and building real products for proper customers."
Specifically, if you're an older programmer, look for very large companies with very old products that are so mission-critical they cannot be redeveloped. Or find a good recruiter who does.
My father spent the last ten years or so of his career contracting out at obscene per-hour rates to shops which needed people who could write COBOL to maintain silly little things like, you know, nuclear power plants and the back ends for national banks. Not *important* stuff like apps for ordering coffee, but it pays a living.
He was still getting pleading emails from recruiters two years after he retired.
I'm assuming the OP is Canadian. I doubt many Americans would manage the "Tie Domi doing figure skating" reference.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
(basically, it's Dancing with the Stars...ON ICE!)
What exactly are we building those absurd arctic "patrol ships" for, do you think? Patrolling? For...polar bear poachers?
Canada produces plenty of copyrighted works, sure. We don't exactly *export* a lot of them, though. I'm not sure how much demand there is in South Korea for episodes of Trailer Park Boys, Murdoch Mysteries or Corner Gas, and those are some of Canadian TV's success stories. :)
Compare and contrast with the other AC whining about evolution below.
When you're being accused by nutters from both sides of being biased towards the other side, I'd say you're doing a reasonable job of being neutral. See also: the BBC.