Should Fedora Spins be rebranded to Fedora Desktops?

I do not agree with this!

Renaming “Spins” to “Desktops” will end up in the same street as it is now.

Now if, when we choose to download Fedora Workstation, we get to a page where it shows us all desktop options “as equals” that would be doing it right!

Or at least having GNOME and Plasma side by side and more relevant, with the rest of the available desktops listed below…

You may even have Fedora GNOME pre-selected on that list but at the very least Plasma should be in equal foot to GNOME…

that was what i would like to see!!!

renaming “Spins” to “Desktops”, to me, is irrelevant.

but maybe that’s just me…

Edit: Also… “Fedora Workstation” should refer to the type of OS/what the OS is destined to (as opposed to Fedora Server), and independent of the Desktop.
This way, what you refer to as Fedora Workstation, should be called Fedora Workstation GNOME, so that there could be other Fedora Workstation’s with other Desktops…

1 Like

I tried the Budgie spin and the Xorg session was root. I thought Fedora prioritized security and GNOME’s X session is rootless, and there’s nothing noting this on the Budgie spin page. I just figured since GNOME was rootless for years on Fedora that everyone else would be doing or support rootless Xorg too by now.

The word Spin implies it’s not the main-supported edition, which I’d be willing to let pass with that Xorg root decreprency. But if security across different editions is random and you’re presenting that randomness in all-official-sounding desktop editions as if they’re all equally-supported, I’d find that sketchy as it sounds like there’s QA differences elsewhere and hop distros.

I didn’t even think I had to check Xorg on Budgie, I was just surprised when I saw something under root when scrolling through processes and had to double-check. Now if I check any other Spin, this is the first thing I’m checking to see if it’s worthwhile.

Thank you all for your feedback! I’ll keep on thinking about this.

I don’t plan on taking immediate next steps for this naming convention specifically. First I want to share my thoughts on how to handle Workstation and the KDE proposal.

As a result of this thread I also want to think about how we organize our Fedora variants holistically. For example, what about Labs? What about Editions? Do we need to revisit how we organize variants in general? I think all we need are minor tweaks, but that’s something I want to think about. It would be a shame for us to tweak brands, presentation, and priority little by little when as a project we would benefit of looking at all the variants as a family.


i would like Workstation not being “tied” to GNOME and could be either GNOME, Plasma, etc…

from my POV

Workstation != to Fedora+Gnome
Workstation should be “Fedora for the end user” + “Any desktop the user likes” :slight_smile:

1 Like

I get the appeal, but how can we possibly deliver a consistent, polished experience and try new features and the latest tech, with any possible desktop?


Hi Matthew. Thanks for your reply.

Yeah, I see the problem, yes!

It would be almost impossible to test every desktop out there.

Maybe focus, at least, on Gnome and Plasma and present the other options as a use at your own risk / community maintained editions…

(i say plasma here not because i use it and prefer it, but because it’s the “second” most used desktop on fedora… apparently… if the situation changes i’m ok with you supporting other DE)

Still, the other desktops should always be a click away to download, or in other words: be as easy to download as the Gnome version (e.g.: you get to the Workstation download page and you get those options right there)

I get it that Fedora is kind of tied to Gnome… but having Plasma as an alternative and as an equal solution would be great to users.

I, personally, right now, feel that i’m not using an “approved” desktop of fedora. I feel i’m using “something” forced on top of Fedora that devs do not approve in anyway (because only gnome is approved). I’m sure it’s not exactly the case and that’s not what you actually want, but that’s how i feel about it! (maybe others feel the same…)

1 Like

all in all, let me add something i feel it’s important:

i don’t like much this “new wave of thinking” that tries to force others (either private or institutions) to abide by “my way of thinking” and as such, while i do exposed what i - personally - liked, you - as an institution - should not feel forced to change in anyway - because you’re not committing any crime in supporting just one DE (in fact, we should be grateful for getting something “free”) ahaha

If you agree with my view, fine. If not, i don’t have the right to force anything. If i don’t like it, i can just get on my way :).

So, no hard feelings if you don’t agree with my ideas :slight_smile:


Even if we not do rename for the moment, we should mention on the Website that the LXDE Desktop is abandoned and that the LXQT project it’s successor.


Joseph Gayoso has written:
“One idea is to rename our Fedora Spins to Fedora Desktops. The initial feedback I’ve received has been positive. Here’s a big post to outline the idea to get more feedback and see if it will be the first step in an exploratory phase for making this move. What do you think?”

I am a “Fedora LXDE Spin” user, although LXDE is in a semi-abandoned state. I think renaming “Fedora LXDE Spin” to “Fedora LXDE Desktop” is a great idea. Both because LXDE is a desktop environment (for better or for worse), and because it would attract possible users to collaborate for its improvement (as far as possible).

You can see what the project leader of Fedora said:

Spins are meant to “spin up” upon a basic fedora installation. If this DE is a save and active Project you can get a desktop of your choice experience with a Fedora underneath. You get this Vanilla, as the projects deliver their DE.

About your LXDE you wish to use, you can do so as long as it is working as it is. If it gets to old once and will be awful to put upon Fedora it might been removed and not available anymore.

I encourage you, if you want to keep it alive, that you start to get into it and help maintain it.

1 Like

But what if you want to use, for example, Fedora KDE Desktop on a laptop, will it then be called Fedora KDE Laptop? :grinning:
No seriously, I think it is a good idea to create equal names for equal versions of the OS, indicating through the name of the DE or WM which edition it is. Go for it.

Just making a Gnome Spin. A simple Fedora-install with a Vanilla Gnome Desktop and without the preinstalled Software for development. And everyone is happy :grin:

It’s false advertising and a ruse. If LXDE really is in a semi-abandonded state, what good is it promoting it as an option Fedora cares about and will actively maintain?

Same goes for the other DEs that aren’t GNOME and KDE. Why do they deserve to be promoted in the same space? And can their quality be assured to be as up-to-par as GNOME or KDE?

I saw Xorg running as root on the F39 Budgie spin and thought that was odd since Fedora was all about security and had rootless X on GNOME for years. And security is a big reason for pushing Wayland, right? So why is Fedora even entertaining other DEs at this point that don’t boot to a usable Wayland session with Xwayland?

Anything that doesn’t do that is not meeting the required development speed to keep up with modern standards. I wouldn’t want end-users of my product to deal with that, and I wouldn’t feel proud shipping that stuff either, especially when I wouldn’t even use it.

1 Like

It is hard to speak as “one” Fedora on a topic like this. Part of what makes Fedora so great is that any group of people can come together, and if they do the work, they can make something and share it with others. However, it is also part of the challenge that in order for technology to be successful in Fedora, someone needs to work to earn the confidence of the community that a particular area of technology is worth developing further together. Many things work like this in Fedora, although not everything does either.

1 Like

I rather doubt that everyone using KDE will be happy with that! I know that I wouldn’t like being given the choice to migrate from Xfce to Gnome or leave Fedora, which is what your idea implies.

“If LXDE really is in a semi-abandonded state, what good is it promoting it as an option Fedora cares about and will actively maintain?”

LXDE is rarely updated (in this sense semi-abandoned). I never thought that Fedora has to care for and maintain a d.e. so different and backwards compared to the Workstation. My suggestion was to continue to keep it on the Spins page (not directly maintained and not supported by Fedora) in the hope that the Linux community (not the Fedora Community) will be able to keep it in a usable state.

Not really, I tried to say if we put also a gnome Spin up, all the desktops are available this way and nobody can say we do give preference to the Gnome desktop on fedora.

The workstation as it is, is a result off our sponsoring we do have with RH. Their preference as an enterprise service provider is Gnome and that’s it. If KDE should compete with Gnome once, they need to strip down the system so that it is usable for a enterprise environment.

The spins would be the pool we all can work with to create new things. If we can convince the community and a paying sponsor we might can bring up a new Workstation as an alternative.

But as long as we are just talking about theories and wishes we will not go ahead. Things will keep the way as they are. And that is not just for Fedora … this is for DE’s in general.

This misses the point in some ways though, and by point I mean in this case the Workstation Working Groups points on what they support and why.
What this (original posters) question is asking seems to presume that all of the spins are on par with the official release of Workstation, and it simply is not the case. While all of Fedora releases would undoubtedly use the fedora minimal core, that content would be where most of the spins diverge from the released workstation, including the KDE Spin. Each Spin and Lab are supported by community members in the form of Special Interest Groups or SIG’s. A good way to get a spin more polish is to help with testing for those SIG’s by becoming a member and do some testing for releases, I’m certain they’d welcome the assistance, and you get to contribute to the overall project in an immediate way.
I see nothing wrong with the name spin or lab when referring to project areas of interest that use the Fedora platform to create more diversity of the expression of that platform. It is after all a community effort, and the users of the :fedora: distribution get to use it the way they want just as they would any good tool.

1 Like

as long as workstation is fedora gnome & silverblue is immutable fedora gnome you can name the rest anything.

geez :roll_eyes:

silverblue is k but if fedora gnome is only silverblue, adios amigo.

#1 on my wish list

beats me.