1:23 p.m.
https://mattdm.fedorapeople.org/misc/newfedoratomiclogomockup.png
With Fedora Atomic Host as primary, the current Fedora Cloud logo would
be still used for the Cloud Base image, but would probably be
de-colored (see the non-Edition logos on https://arm.fedoraproject.org/
for an example).
Feedback? I think it looks great.
--
Matthew Miller
<mattdm(a)fedoraproject.org>
Fedora Project Leader
1:25 p.m.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Matthew Miller" <mattdm(a)fedoraproject.org>
To: "Fedora Cloud SIG" <cloud(a)lists.fedoraproject.org>
Sent: Tuesday, September 15, 2015 11:23:54 AM
Subject: Mo's proposed fedora atomic logo
https://mattdm.fedorapeople.org/misc/newfedoratomiclogomockup.png
With Fedora Atomic Host as primary, the current Fedora Cloud logo would
be still used for the Cloud Base image, but would probably be
de-colored (see the non-Edition logos on https://arm.fedoraproject.org/
for an example).
Feedback? I think it looks great.
+1 excellent
--
Matthew Miller
<mattdm(a)fedoraproject.org>
Fedora Project Leader
_______________________________________________
cloud mailing list
cloud(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/cloud
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
1:35 p.m.
On 09/15/2015 01:23 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
https://mattdm.fedorapeople.org/misc/newfedoratomiclogomockup.png
With Fedora Atomic Host as primary, the current Fedora Cloud logo would
be still used for the Cloud Base image, but would probably be
de-colored (see the non-Edition logos on https://arm.fedoraproject.org/
for an example).
Feedback? I think it looks great.
Wowzers. That is really awesome. ;)
--
Major Hayden
1:46 p.m.
On 09/15/2015 02:23 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
https://mattdm.fedorapeople.org/misc/newfedoratomiclogomockup.png
With Fedora Atomic Host as primary, the current Fedora Cloud logo would
be still used for the Cloud Base image, but would probably be
de-colored (see the non-Edition logos on https://arm.fedoraproject.org/
for an example).
Feedback? I think it looks great.
Love it. +1
--
Joe Brockmeier | Community Team, OSAS
jzb(a)redhat.com | http://community.redhat.com/
Twitter: @jzb | http://dissociatedpress.net/
2:17 p.m.
On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 1:23 PM, Matthew Miller
<mattdm(a)fedoraproject.org> wrote:
https://mattdm.fedorapeople.org/misc/newfedoratomiclogomockup.png
With Fedora Atomic Host as primary, the current Fedora Cloud logo would
be still used for the Cloud Base image, but would probably be
de-colored (see the non-Edition logos on https://arm.fedoraproject.org/
for an example).
Feedback? I think it looks great.
+1
Absolutely amazing!
-AdamM
--
Matthew Miller
<mattdm(a)fedoraproject.org>
Fedora Project Leader
_______________________________________________
cloud mailing list
cloud(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/cloud
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
2:27 p.m.
On 09/15/2015 02:23 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
https://mattdm.fedorapeople.org/misc/newfedoratomiclogomockup.png
With Fedora Atomic Host as primary, the current Fedora Cloud logo would
be still used for the Cloud Base image, but would probably be
de-colored (see the non-Edition logos on https://arm.fedoraproject.org/
for an example).
Feedback? I think it looks great.
A++ ship it
--
Ryan Brown / Software Engineer, Openstack / Red Hat, Inc.
2:48 p.m.
On 09/15/2015 02:23 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
https://mattdm.fedorapeople.org/misc/newfedoratomiclogomockup.png
With Fedora Atomic Host as primary, the current Fedora Cloud logo would
be still used for the Cloud Base image, but would probably be
de-colored (see the non-Edition logos on https://arm.fedoraproject.org/
for an example).
Feedback? I think it looks great.
The Atomic logo looks great! One thing...
I don't see the Fedora Cloud logo? I know we agreed to focus on atomic
but I didn't think we were completely getting rid of Fedora cloud
branding? I thought Atomic was simply going to sit under "cloud"
umbrella. If I am a user and I come to a page with those three
logos/labels on it I would ask myself "which one of these do I click on
to get the Fedora Cloud Base image?"
Dusty
3:20 p.m.
On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 03:48:18PM -0400, Dusty Mabe wrote:
The Atomic logo looks great! One thing...
I don't see the Fedora Cloud logo? I know we agreed to focus on
atomic but I didn't think we were completely getting rid of Fedora
cloud branding? I thought Atomic was simply going to sit under
"cloud" umbrella. If I am a user and I come to a page with those
three logos/labels on it I would ask myself "which one of these do I
click on to get the Fedora Cloud Base image?"
Thanks for bringing that up. I need to bring some of this out of wiki
pages and irc chat and other buried locations (including my remembrance
of what we talked about at Flock!). Take a look at
<https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Two_Week_Atomic/Website> for
what *I'm* thinking. As noted at the top, it's not final (see last
paragraph of _this_ mail).
A key goal of the getfedora.org site was clear presentation of the
editions, with less of a Choose Your Own Adventure feel. But the
current F21/F22 getfedora.org page for cloud pulls in a lot of
different directions. Mo said something like "apples, apples,
broccoli". Docker even got stuck there for lack of a better home.
(Apples, broccoli, apple seeds?)
So, narrowing that down to one thing seemed good. In the initial
Two-Week Atomic proposal, Atomic was to be moved off of getfedora.org
to its own home at atomic.fedoraproject.org, with a design similar to
existing https://arm.fedoraproject.org/.
With making Atomic the focus, keeping that same basic idea of clear
presentation seemed like the right thing to do. The people looking for
Atomic and the people looking for the Cloud Base image probably aren't
the same group, so we probably don't want to put them under the same
top-level brochure path (even though the same group is concerned with
both behind the scenes).
So, *this* proposal has a separate page for cloud images,
cloud.fedoraproject.org, with *that* modeled after the arm download
page. We talked about adding it to https://spins.fedoraproject.org/ or
to https://labs.fedoraproject.org/, but it doesn't fit with the new
focus of that site.
Also, http://getfedora.org is getting a refresh, and as part of that
design, the "Looking for more Fedora?" section will become a lot more
prominent, including logos for KDE and XFCE. That's where I'm thinking
the link to the cloud page with the Cloud Base image would go. That
way, someone not interested in Atomic and just looking for Fedora In
The Cloud would be able to find it on the front page with reasonable
prominence, while someone looking for "What's Fedora's featured stuff?"
would see Workstation, Server, Atomic first.
I also think it's reasonable to have a link to the Atomic page from the
cloud page, and vice versa, so that anyone who _does_ come in through
the maze that way won't be lost.
All that said, I may be getting a little ahead of myself in excitement
-- if not everyone is down with this plan, let's figure out what it
*should* look like. I hope I'm not actually too far off and that all of
the above makes sense.
--
Matthew Miller
<mattdm(a)fedoraproject.org>
Fedora Project Leader
3:41 p.m.
On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 04:20:36PM -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
All that said, I may be getting a little ahead of myself in
excitement
-- if not everyone is down with this plan, let's figure out what it
*should* look like. I hope I'm not actually too far off and that all of
the above makes sense.
Also, if the plan is indeed to aim for post-F23, we have plenty of time
to figure this out, so please don't feel rushed by my enthusiasm. :)
--
Matthew Miller
<mattdm(a)fedoraproject.org>
Fedora Project Leader
2:54 p.m.
2015-09-15 20:23 GMT+02:00 Matthew Miller <mattdm(a)fedoraproject.org>:
https://mattdm.fedorapeople.org/misc/newfedoratomiclogomockup.png
With Fedora Atomic Host as primary, the current Fedora Cloud logo would
be still used for the Cloud Base image, but would probably be
de-colored (see the non-Edition logos on https://arm.fedoraproject.org/
for an example).
Feedback? I think it looks great.
+2 /me wants it
But if the council allows us to do so, I'd like to keep the colored logo
for Fedora Cloud as we don't want to give the impression that it's not an
official product or less supported that it actually is.
H.
3:37 p.m.
On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 09:54:39PM +0200, Haïkel wrote:
But if the council allows us to do so, I'd like to keep the
colored logo
for Fedora Cloud as we don't want to give the impression that it's not an
official product or less supported that it actually is.
We have a lot of official Fedora -- let's avoid the word "product" here
just for unambiguity -- "things-we-produce" which get the
less-prominent logo, including the release-blocking KDE spin. These
aren't less _Fedora_ than Cloud / Server / Workstation are today —
they're just not in the "Editions" bucket.
The color vs. gray representation comes from the Design team, not the
Council. If cloud WG wants to ask the Council to have four editions,
Workstation / Server / Cloud / Atomic, rather than pivoting to
Workstation / Server / Atomic.... well, I'm not opposed to the
_request_ but do obviously have an opinion.
Restating that opinion for the record: we worked on the Editions (née
Products) proposal for a long time, coming from a lot of different
possible directions, and we settled on asking for Editions which aim
for relatively narrow use cases with specific user targets, with the
goal of growing Fedora in new ways. Even though all of our work on the
Cloud Base image has been awesome (and I hope useful to people), it
never really fit that, especially without some of the things like SCLs
for language stacks that would have provided a good story. So, some 80%
of my enthusiasm for Fedora Atomic comes simply because it *does* fit
that picture so well. (That I also think it's a major step in OS
evolution is just... icing on the cake.)
--
Matthew Miller
<mattdm(a)fedoraproject.org>
Fedora Project Leader
3:52 p.m.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Matthew Miller" <mattdm(a)fedoraproject.org>
To: "Fedora Cloud SIG" <cloud(a)lists.fedoraproject.org>
Sent: Tuesday, September 15, 2015 1:37:47 PM
Subject: Re: Mo's proposed fedora atomic logo
On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 09:54:39PM +0200, Haïkel wrote:
> But if the council allows us to do so, I'd like to keep the colored logo
> for Fedora Cloud as we don't want to give the impression that it's not an
> official product or less supported that it actually is.
We have a lot of official Fedora -- let's avoid the word "product" here
just for unambiguity -- "things-we-produce" which get the
less-prominent logo, including the release-blocking KDE spin. These
aren't less _Fedora_ than Cloud / Server / Workstation are today —
they're just not in the "Editions" bucket.
The color vs. gray representation comes from the Design team, not the
Council. If cloud WG wants to ask the Council to have four editions,
Workstation / Server / Cloud / Atomic, rather than pivoting to
Workstation / Server / Atomic.... well, I'm not opposed to the
_request_ but do obviously have an opinion.
If I didn't already know about the cloud base image as its own
WG and such, I would have looked for it as a variant of the Server
product.
Restating that opinion for the record: we worked on the Editions (née
Products) proposal for a long time, coming from a lot of different
possible directions, and we settled on asking for Editions which aim
for relatively narrow use cases with specific user targets, with the
goal of growing Fedora in new ways. Even though all of our work on the
Cloud Base image has been awesome (and I hope useful to people), it
never really fit that, especially without some of the things like SCLs
for language stacks that would have provided a good story. So, some 80%
of my enthusiasm for Fedora Atomic comes simply because it *does* fit
that picture so well. (That I also think it's a major step in OS
evolution is just... icing on the cake.)
--
Matthew Miller
<mattdm(a)fedoraproject.org>
Fedora Project Leader
_______________________________________________
cloud mailing list
cloud(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/cloud
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
4:10 p.m.
2015-09-15 22:52 GMT+02:00 Jason Brooks <jbrooks(a)redhat.com>:
If I didn't already know about the cloud base image as its own
WG and such, I would have looked for it as a variant of the Server
product.
It makes sense (that's why we support the cattle-to-pet scenario), but
server folks are focusing towards a different segment.
If you read about bimodal IT (thanks Gartner for feeding me with funny
buzzwords), server is focusing to traditional IT (mode 1) and cloud to
agile IT (mode 2).
Depending how things evolve around containers, we might consider that
cloud should solely focus on Atomic and maybe transfer ownership of
the classic image to server WG. But this is too early for considering
this.
After all, we decided to make Atomic primary to boost it, and refine
our story around it.
7:48 a.m.
On 09/15/2015 05:10 PM, Haïkel wrote:
2015-09-15 22:52 GMT+02:00 Jason Brooks <jbrooks(a)redhat.com>:
>
>
> If I didn't already know about the cloud base image as its own
> WG and such, I would have looked for it as a variant of the Server
> product.
>
It makes sense (that's why we support the cattle-to-pet scenario), but
server folks are focusing towards a different segment.
If you read about bimodal IT (thanks Gartner for feeding me with funny
buzzwords), server is focusing to traditional IT (mode 1) and cloud to
agile IT (mode 2).
Depending how things evolve around containers, we might consider that
cloud should solely focus on Atomic and maybe transfer ownership of
the classic image to server WG. But this is too early for considering
this.
After all, we decided to make Atomic primary to boost it, and refine
our story around it.
I think we're over-estimating where users are in the "magic bi-modal IT
devops agile transformation quadrant" (which I hear Gartner is calling
it now).
I think there's a fairly close mapping from where users are in the
adoption cycle to what page they need to get to.
Early adopters -> Atomic
Early majority -> Cloud/Server
Late majority/long tail -> Server/Workstation
There's your early adopters are already all about containers and know
they want Atomic, and they'll go get it. We don't even really need to
highlight it very much, just mention "Atomic is a cloud thing for
containers" and they'll be all over it.
The early majority has some stuff in the cloud already, and probably
still have some "pets" either on real hardware or long-lived VMs. They
might look at Atomic to evaluate it, but are likely still going to have
Cloud or Server as their bread and butter. Highlighting atomic from the
cloud page and the main getfedora.org would help us get these users into
Atomic.
The "early majority" will still have the Cloud/Server products as their
main consumption for quite some time, and even if we think containers
are where the cloud is going, there aren't going to be loads of users
there for a while.
I'm not sure that transferring the cloud image over to the Server WG
makes much sense, since the Cloud WG has the expertise and infra to
maintain it already.
--
Ryan Brown / Software Engineer, Openstack / Red Hat, Inc.
8:49 a.m.
2015-09-16 14:48 GMT+02:00 Ryan Brown <rybrown(a)redhat.com>:
I think we're over-estimating where users are in the "magic bi-modal IT
devops agile transformation quadrant" (which I hear Gartner is calling it
now).
I think there's a fairly close mapping from where users are in the adoption
cycle to what page they need to get to.
Early adopters -> Atomic
Early majority -> Cloud/Server
Late majority/long tail -> Server/Workstation
Nope, we currently agree on that part, I've even said the same thing
in a pv yesterday :)
There's your early adopters are already all about containers and
know they
want Atomic, and they'll go get it. We don't even really need to highlight
it very much, just mention "Atomic is a cloud thing for containers" and
they'll be all over it.
No, they want containers and containers-oriented systems but they're
not aware of the existence of Atomic.
Hence the decision to make Atomic primary, we want to raise awareness
around the project.
Currently, people are all getting giddy around CoreOS which has
developed interesting components but overall story is quite weak.
The early majority has some stuff in the cloud already, and probably
still
have some "pets" either on real hardware or long-lived VMs. They might look
at Atomic to evaluate it, but are likely still going to have Cloud or Server
as their bread and butter. Highlighting atomic from the cloud page and the
main getfedora.org would help us get these users into Atomic.
The "early majority" will still have the Cloud/Server products as their main
consumption for quite some time, and even if we think containers are where
the cloud is going, there aren't going to be loads of users there for a
while.
I agree about traditional cloud images but regarding Fedora Cloud, our
adoption rate is still low compared to other images.
If we start giving off the signal that Fedora Cloud is getting less
maintained while it's the contrary, we'll be ruining our efforts
there. Kushal, Mike and others did an excellent work on Fedora Classic
Cloud and the effort will be maintained at the same level or even
better.
Primary is Atomic, but Classic will still maintained for some time and
at the same level than currently. That's the message.
I'm not sure that transferring the cloud image over to the Server
WG makes
much sense, since the Cloud WG has the expertise and infra to maintain it
already.
Well, we're pretty far for even considering this but I see it as
possible in the future.
During Flock Prague, people took me for a fool when I asked Fesco if
we could imagine that one day, Fedora could switch to the Atomic model
rather than the traditional package one.
When I look at the work in progress about desktop app containers,
we're not that far from making it happen in a few years.
H.
--
Ryan Brown / Software Engineer, Openstack / Red Hat, Inc.
_______________________________________________
cloud mailing list
cloud(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/cloud
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
9:17 a.m.
++1 on the logo, it looks great
If we start giving off the signal that Fedora Cloud is getting less
maintained while it's the contrary, we'll be ruining our
efforts
there. Kushal, Mike and others did an excellent work on Fedora Classic
Cloud and the effort will be maintained at the same level or even
better.
This has been my biggest concern with changing the focus of the SIG,
external communication about the the Classic Cloud image (I like that
btw). I think this proposal from Máirín's other email on the website
design is key:
- Consider replacing the “Cloud” edition slot on the front of
getfedora.org with
a Fedora “Atomic” edition brand.
Overall this is primarily an external marketing focus for the project. The
work that is being done by the SIG won't stop or slow, but there's an
additional focus on a different edition because of containers. That the
work being done to make Fedora Server a "good guest OS" as Cloud Classic
edition is hopefully easier to find and consume.
Giving Fedora Atomic a new set of spaces rather than replacing the existing
set of websites helps to enforce the idea that the Cloud base isn't being
abandoned. I'd go so far as to say we need to focus more on the Early
Majority and see what the roadblocks to adoption of Fedora Server Cloud
Classic (ok, now I'm getting silly) exist.
Also, containers and Atomic aren't *just* for clouds, so getting a little
more space there is beneficial too.
- Matt M
On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 9:49 AM, Haïkel <hguemar(a)fedoraproject.org> wrote:
> 2015-09-16 14:48 GMT+02:00 Ryan Brown <rybrown(a)redhat.com>:
> >
> >
> > I think we're over-estimating where users are in the "magic bi-modal
IT
> > devops agile transformation quadrant" (which I hear Gartner is calling it
> > now).
> >
> > I think there's a fairly close mapping from where users are in the
> adoption
> > cycle to what page they need to get to.
> >
> > Early adopters -> Atomic
> > Early majority -> Cloud/Server
> > Late majority/long tail -> Server/Workstation
> >
>
> Nope, we currently agree on that part, I've even said the same thing
> in a pv yesterday :)
>
>
> > There's your early adopters are already all about containers and know
> they
> > want Atomic, and they'll go get it. We don't even really need to
> highlight
> > it very much, just mention "Atomic is a cloud thing for containers"
and
> > they'll be all over it.
> >
>
> No, they want containers and containers-oriented systems but they're
> not aware of the existence of Atomic.
> Hence the decision to make Atomic primary, we want to raise awareness
> around the project.
>
> Currently, people are all getting giddy around CoreOS which has
> developed interesting components but overall story is quite weak.
>
> > The early majority has some stuff in the cloud already, and probably
> still
> > have some "pets" either on real hardware or long-lived VMs. They
might
> look
> > at Atomic to evaluate it, but are likely still going to have Cloud or
> Server
> > as their bread and butter. Highlighting atomic from the cloud page and
> the
> > main getfedora.org would help us get these users into Atomic.
> >
> > The "early majority" will still have the Cloud/Server products as
their
> main
> > consumption for quite some time, and even if we think containers are
> where
> > the cloud is going, there aren't going to be loads of users there for a
> > while.
> >
>
> I agree about traditional cloud images but regarding Fedora Cloud, our
> adoption rate is still low compared to other images.
> If we start giving off the signal that Fedora Cloud is getting less
maintained while it's the contrary, we'll be ruining our
efforts
there. Kushal, Mike and others did an excellent work on Fedora Classic
Cloud and the effort will be maintained at the same level or even
better.
> Primary is Atomic, but Classic will still maintained for some time
and
> at the same level than currently. That's the message.
>
> > I'm not sure that transferring the cloud image over to the Server WG
> makes
> > much sense, since the Cloud WG has the expertise and infra to maintain it
> > already.
>
> Well, we're pretty far for even considering this but I see it as
> possible in the future.
> During Flock Prague, people took me for a fool when I asked Fesco if
> we could imagine that one day, Fedora could switch to the Atomic model
> rather than the traditional package one.
> When I look at the work in progress about desktop app containers,
> we're not that far from making it happen in a few years.
>
>
> H.
>
> > --
> > Ryan Brown / Software Engineer, Openstack / Red Hat, Inc.
> > _______________________________________________
> > cloud mailing list
> > cloud(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
> > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/cloud
> > Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
> _______________________________________________
> cloud mailing list
> cloud(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/cloud
> Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
>
5:56 a.m.
On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 04:52:41PM -0400, Jason Brooks wrote:
If I didn't already know about the cloud base image as its own
WG and such, I would have looked for it as a variant of the Server
product.
Yeah, so one future direction might be for the cloud guest
download/launch page to include guest images for _all_ of the editions
and spins which make sense -- cloud base, server, and even xfce (I saw
a great demo of this running remotely via x2go at Flock). Again see
https://arm.fedoraproject.org/ as a model.
--
Matthew Miller
<mattdm(a)fedoraproject.org>
Fedora Project Leader
8:45 p.m.
On 2015-09-15 11:23, Matthew Miller wrote:
I think it looks great! Do we have permission from the Project Atomic
folks to use their logo for this?
With Fedora Atomic Host as primary, the current Fedora Cloud logo
would
be still used for the Cloud Base image, but would probably be
de-colored (see the non-Edition logos on https://arm.fedoraproject.org/
for an example).
I can't say I'm looking forward to a seventh download page.
--
Garrett Holmstrom
5:53 a.m.
On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 06:45:14PM -0700, Garrett Holmstrom wrote:
On 2015-09-15 11:23, Matthew Miller wrote:
>https://mattdm.fedorapeople.org/misc/newfedoratomiclogomockup.png
I think it looks great! Do we have permission from the Project
Atomic folks to use their logo for this?
Yes -- we've got official permission for the name and logo.
>With Fedora Atomic Host as primary, the current Fedora Cloud logo
would
>be still used for the Cloud Base image, but would probably be
>de-colored (see the non-Edition logos on https://arm.fedoraproject.org/
>for an example).
I can't say I'm looking forward to a seventh download page.
Each has its audience and purpose. For getting everything from one
place, there's always http://download.fedoraproject.org/pub/fedora/linux/
--
Matthew Miller
<mattdm(a)fedoraproject.org>
Fedora Project Leader
3137
days inactive
3138
days old
18 comments
10 participants
participants (10)
-
Adam Miller -
Dusty Mabe -
Garrett Holmstrom -
Haïkel -
Jason Brooks -
Joe Brockmeier -
Major Hayden -
Matt Micene -
Matthew Miller -
Ryan Brown