On 04/29/2016 03:47 AM, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
On Thu, Apr 28, 2016 at 8:19 PM, Joe Brockmeier
<jzb(a)redhat.com> wrote:
> On 04/28/2016 11:02 AM, Matthew Miller wrote:
>>
>> I think we might benefit from having an official branding for
>> initiatives somewhere in between — work done *in* the project, but not
>> necessarily yet accepted into our "mainline". This would encourage
>> innovation _within_ Fedora without causing confusion over whether
>> something is "official".
>
> 1) would this create confusion with something like the Apache Incubator,
> which is well-defined but not well-understood outside Apache circles?
>
> 2) I like the idea, but an example project might help illustrate here.
>
> 3) What are the criteria for "graduating"?
This is a very good question, same as I asked when we were talking
about labs projects some time ago. It doesn't make any sense to try to
work on "labs"/"incubator" project if there's no way how to
graduate
to official product/project/flavor/whatever you call it. Currently we
have strict set of the only official flavors and it's impossible to
graduate to one even you have everything the other have, even more, we
tried in KDE SIG :). Or vice versa - downgrade to incubator...
At the risk of derailing this thread, KDE SIG was told that the criteria for a
new top-level Edition in Fedora was that it had to serve a new "market
segment".
Plasma Edition had almost a 100% overlap with the Workstation Edition and would
have therefore been in direct competition.
If instead you built a new product *atop* Plasma, it could still be promoted.
(Off-the-cuff examples: a Fedora Home Automation Suite, Fedora TV Set-Top Box or
Fedora Cellphone using Plasma as the operating environment).