On 04/28/2016 12:45 PM, Josh Boyer wrote:
- I like the idea, but an example project might help illustrate here.
Agreed, though I have some of my own ideas.
- What are the criteria for "graduating"? Who are the mentors in this
example? (Mentors are a key part of the incubator for Apache.)
Do projects have to graduate? I don't want this to be viewed as a competition between initiatives, and promotion/relegaion/graduation seem to set a competitive tone. As soon as you start talking about graduation or promotion, you start getting into resource allocation issues, etc.
I'd personally be fine if a project joined the incubator and stayed there. If they wanted to somehow because an Objective, we already have paths for that.
I can think of at least one Atomic effort (the OSTree continuous integration) which might stay in Incubator permanently.
Given that, are you sure you want to call it "Incubator"? That name does imply maturation at some point, even without the Apache precendent.
What about "Fedora Innovator" or "Fedora Labs"?
On 04/28/2016 05:20 PM, Josh Berkus wrote:
On 04/28/2016 12:45 PM, Josh Boyer wrote:
- I like the idea, but an example project might help illustrate here.
Agreed, though I have some of my own ideas.
- What are the criteria for "graduating"? Who are the mentors in this
example? (Mentors are a key part of the incubator for Apache.)
Do projects have to graduate? I don't want this to be viewed as a competition between initiatives, and promotion/relegaion/graduation seem to set a competitive tone. As soon as you start talking about graduation or promotion, you start getting into resource allocation issues, etc.
I'd personally be fine if a project joined the incubator and stayed there. If they wanted to somehow because an Objective, we already have paths for that.
I can think of at least one Atomic effort (the OSTree continuous integration) which might stay in Incubator permanently.
Given that, are you sure you want to call it "Incubator"? That name does imply maturation at some point, even without the Apache precendent.
What about "Fedora Innovator" or "Fedora Labs"?
Tongue firmly planted in cheek: Fedora Bike Shop?
On 28 April 2016 at 19:36, Stephen Gallagher sgallagh@redhat.com wrote:
On 04/28/2016 05:20 PM, Josh Berkus wrote:
On 04/28/2016 12:45 PM, Josh Boyer wrote:
- I like the idea, but an example project might help illustrate here.
Agreed, though I have some of my own ideas.
- What are the criteria for "graduating"? Who are the mentors in this
example? (Mentors are a key part of the incubator for Apache.)
Do projects have to graduate? I don't want this to be viewed as a competition between initiatives, and promotion/relegaion/graduation seem to set a competitive tone. As soon as you start talking about graduation or promotion, you start getting into resource allocation issues, etc.
I'd personally be fine if a project joined the incubator and stayed there. If they wanted to somehow because an Objective, we already have paths for that.
I can think of at least one Atomic effort (the OSTree continuous integration) which might stay in Incubator permanently.
Given that, are you sure you want to call it "Incubator"? That name does imply maturation at some point, even without the Apache precendent.
What about "Fedora Innovator" or "Fedora Labs"?
Tongue firmly planted in cheek: Fedora Bike Shop?
Shed? [Sorry I couldn't resist..]
On 04/28/2016 07:36 PM, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
Tongue firmly planted in cheek: Fedora Bike Shop?
+1
But what color would the logo be?
On Thu, Apr 28, 2016 at 02:20:19PM -0700, Josh Berkus wrote:
I can think of at least one Atomic effort (the OSTree continuous integration) which might stay in Incubator permanently.
Given that, are you sure you want to call it "Incubator"? That name does imply maturation at some point, even without the Apache precendent.
What about "Fedora Innovator" or "Fedora Labs"?
"Labs" would be great, except design/websites already picked that for https://labs.fedoraproject.org/.
On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 12:50 PM, Matthew Miller mattdm@fedoraproject.org wrote:
On Thu, Apr 28, 2016 at 02:20:19PM -0700, Josh Berkus wrote:
I can think of at least one Atomic effort (the OSTree continuous integration) which might stay in Incubator permanently.
Given that, are you sure you want to call it "Incubator"? That name does imply maturation at some point, even without the Apache precendent.
What about "Fedora Innovator" or "Fedora Labs"?
"Labs" would be great, except design/websites already picked that for https://labs.fedoraproject.org/.
"Commons" or "Collaborative"?
josh
On 04/29/2016 12:51 PM, Josh Boyer wrote:
On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 12:50 PM, Matthew Miller mattdm@fedoraproject.org wrote:
On Thu, Apr 28, 2016 at 02:20:19PM -0700, Josh Berkus wrote:
I can think of at least one Atomic effort (the OSTree continuous integration) which might stay in Incubator permanently.
Given that, are you sure you want to call it "Incubator"? That name does imply maturation at some point, even without the Apache precendent.
What about "Fedora Innovator" or "Fedora Labs"?
"Labs" would be great, except design/websites already picked that for https://labs.fedoraproject.org/.
"Commons" or "Collaborative"?
Not trying to keep the bikeshedding going further on naming ideas, but an alliteration would be cool, e.g. "Fedora F(thing)". Some ideas that fit with this:
* Fedora Foundry * Fedora Factory * Fedora Forge
Personally, of the three, I think "Forge" sounds the best and it's already a commonly used term for the place where software development happens. Plus, I can easily see a pretty strong logo idea / general theme for something like this. Just my 2¢!
-- Cheers, Justin W. Flory jflory7@gmail.com
The ideas sounds great. I like the name Fedora Forge.
-- Abdel G. Martínez L.
On Apr 29, 2016, at 11:56 AM, Justin W. Flory jflory7@gmail.com wrote:
On 04/29/2016 12:51 PM, Josh Boyer wrote: On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 12:50 PM, Matthew Miller mattdm@fedoraproject.org wrote:
On Thu, Apr 28, 2016 at 02:20:19PM -0700, Josh Berkus wrote:
I can think of at least one Atomic effort (the OSTree continuous integration) which might stay in Incubator permanently.
Given that, are you sure you want to call it "Incubator"? That name does imply maturation at some point, even without the Apache precendent.
What about "Fedora Innovator" or "Fedora Labs"?
"Labs" would be great, except design/websites already picked that for https://labs.fedoraproject.org/.
"Commons" or "Collaborative"?
Not trying to keep the bikeshedding going further on naming ideas, but an alliteration would be cool, e.g. "Fedora F(thing)". Some ideas that fit with this:
- Fedora Foundry
- Fedora Factory
- Fedora Forge
Personally, of the three, I think "Forge" sounds the best and it's already a commonly used term for the place where software development happens. Plus, I can easily see a pretty strong logo idea / general theme for something like this. Just my 2¢!
-- Cheers, Justin W. Flory jflory7@gmail.com
council-discuss mailing list council-discuss@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/council-discuss@lists.fedoraproje...
The Fedora Project's mission is to lead the advancement of free and open source software and content as a collaborative community.
On 04/29/2016 12:56 PM, Justin W. Flory wrote:
Personally, of the three, I think "Forge" sounds the best and it's already a commonly used term for the place where software development happens. Plus, I can easily see a pretty strong logo idea / general theme for something like this. Just my 2¢!
There's an openSUSE Factory IIRC so .. probably not. And "Forge" has some connotations probably best avoided. It was all the rage to call things a this or that forge years ago, and I think SourceForge sort of soured the term.
Did we ever get a more authoritative answer on this thread to what the incubator is meant to incubate? I don't think Matthew ever directly responded to that. Seems people assume its either for incubating Fedora related technologies, so for instance the Fedora Media Writer could have been incubated there. Or is is meant as a place to incubate future Fedora editions?
I am having trouble inputting on the naming without understanding where the idea is coming from and what problem it will solve that we currently have.
Christian
----- Original Message -----
From: "Joe Brockmeier" jzb@redhat.com To: council-discuss@lists.fedoraproject.org Sent: Friday, April 29, 2016 2:37:13 PM Subject: Re: Creating a "Fedora Incubator" brand
On 04/29/2016 12:56 PM, Justin W. Flory wrote:
Personally, of the three, I think "Forge" sounds the best and it's already a commonly used term for the place where software development happens. Plus, I can easily see a pretty strong logo idea / general theme for something like this. Just my 2¢!
There's an openSUSE Factory IIRC so .. probably not. And "Forge" has some connotations probably best avoided. It was all the rage to call things a this or that forge years ago, and I think SourceForge sort of soured the term. -- Joe Brockmeier | Community Team, OSAS jzb@redhat.com | http://community.redhat.com/ Twitter: @jzb | http://dissociatedpress.net/
council-discuss mailing list council-discuss@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/council-discuss@lists.fedoraproje...
The Fedora Project's mission is to lead the advancement of free and open source software and content as a collaborative community.
On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 02:45:15PM -0400, Christian Schaller wrote:
Did we ever get a more authoritative answer on this thread to what the incubator is meant to incubate? I don't think Matthew ever directly responded to that. Seems people assume its either for incubating Fedora related technologies, so for instance the Fedora Media Writer could have been incubated there. Or is is meant as a place to incubate future Fedora editions?
I was not thinking of it as incubating Editions. In fact, potential future Editions are basically Spins, and almost certainly could be done through the existing framework.
I was thinking more of things like COPR, which includes code and binaries which are not "only software provided by the official Fedora repositories" as described in our trademark guidelines.¹ It's incredibly valuable for us to provide services like that under the larger Fedora umbrella, but we don't really have trademark guidelines to match.
Atomic is another example, or the next new thing to come along like it². This is much more radical than a Spin, requiring new release engineering infrastructure and tooling — and ideally, with the option of at least temporarily branching from software in the main repository. Currently, we primarily present the options of "do it all outside of Fedora" or "get everything perfect in release engineering before even starting", neither of which is good.
Or, consider the efforts to reduce the dependency tree for the Fedora base. Some of this might involve invasive changes to dependencies in packages. I guess that could be done as a Remix, but since this work is actually directly interesting and important to the future of Fedora itself, it'd be cool to keep it closer to home.
I saw the suggestion somewhere of a Fedora-based userspace specifically engineered to live *inside* containers, with no worry about this weird stuff like "booting" and "kernels" and "hardware". That too could be a Remix, but why send people that far away?
Do these examples help?
1. See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Legal:Trademark_guidelines#New_combinations_o... 2. Like maybe the first iterations of an ostree-based Fedora Workstation. Or maybe something even more radical.
council-discuss@lists.fedoraproject.org
-
Abdel Gadiel Martínez Lassonde -
Christian Schaller -
Joe Brockmeier -
Josh Berkus -
Josh Boyer -
Justin W. Flory -
Matthew Miller -
Stephen Gallagher -
Stephen John Smoogen