Fedora Ring 0 definition

[Ian Malone]

On 7 September 2015 at 13:21, Miloslav Trmac <mitr at redhat.com> wrote:

>
> Also, it seems to me that it would be useful to, at least conceptually, to
> not think about Fedora as a self-hosting perpetual motion^Wrecompilation
> machine, but as “just another huge application” being built using compilers
> and other tools which come from $some_other_magic_place. That’s not to say
> that self-hosting is not valuable—it is a critical property of the subset of
> the Open Source ecosystem which Fedora distributes—but it is more of a
> property of the ecosystem than the produced artifacts.
>

I'm perfectly happy to leave this discussion to Redhat people, and I
think you have some good points about not letting implementation drive
goals. However people seem to be talking down self-hosting here. For
fedora as a distribution self-hosting is a part of the "Freedom"
foundation. It's no good insisting that source is available for
packages if they cannot be built. Similarly it's not just a part of
the ecosystem as that might imply, since the ability to improve and
extend it also requires self-hosting. I've no opinion beyond that on
whether it's considered part of ring 0 or cube beta.

-- 
imalone
http://ibmalone.blogspot.co.uk