Board efforts: scope, concept, and permission?

[Jesse Keating]

On Tue, 2010-02-02 at 14:16 -0600, Adam Miller wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 1:43 PM, Jesse Keating <jkeating at redhat.com> wrote:
> > On Tue, 2010-02-02 at 13:15 -0600, Adam Miller wrote:
> >>
> >> Your example doesn't work, Xubuntu is still bound to the package set
> >> in the Ubuntu repositories in the same sense that the Xfce Spin is
> >> bound to the package set in the Fedora repositories. The difference is
> >> that we understand that the Xfce Spin isn't a fork and shouldn't be
> >> presented as a completely separate project.
> >
> > This only works if your special interest groups are completely
> > segregated, and that they agree on how the shared packages work.  But
> > what if you don't?  What if the Desktop (gnome) set wants the newest
> > versions of PolicyKit, of NetworkManager, of DeviceKit, etc..  but the
> > KDE group doesn't have any software that works with those, and instead
> > wants the older versions they do have software to work with.  How do you
> > resolve this conflict of interest?  Who wins?
> <snip>
> 
> I thought the whole point of having a "Default" is saying that it is
> what would "win" and I was under the impression that had all been
> sorted out by this point.
> 

Not at all.  That's why the target audience discussion continues.  The
"Default" we have now is a product of inertia from Red Hat Linux, status
quo of continuing that inertia, and the chaos of every packager having
their own target audience in mind and designing packages within their
influence for it, regardless of other consumers of their package.

What we also have is two distinct arguments:

1) What is our target audience?

and

2) Do we need a target audience

These distinct arguments are often rolled into the same discussion and
go nowhere.

-- 
Jesse Keating RHCE      (http://jkeating.livejournal.com)
Fedora Project          (http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/JesseKeating)
GPG Public Key          (geek.j2solutions.net/jkeating.j2solutions.pub)
identi.ca               (http://identi.ca/jkeating)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20100202/60266469/attachment.bin