Creating a "Fedora Incubator" brand

[Matthew Miller]

Bikeshedding on the name welcome, but here's the concept:

Right now, we have the main Fedora brand, which as the guidelines stand
generally applies to the main Fedora operating system distribution and
to our core activities. And we have the Fedora Remix brand, which is
very clearly for work _outside_ of Fedora Proper.

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".

What do you think?


-- 
Matthew Miller
<mattdm(a)fedoraproject.org&gt;
Fedora Project Leader

[Zoltan Hoppar]

IMHO I think we already do an developer portal, where would be good
idea to separate them, marking the projects within the "Fedora Hosted"
kind of page as mainline and outer projects. I think listing startup
projects, new ideas, looking for contributors openly, and see
activities in a single page would be a great idea to involve and
produce activity. Just separating IMHO can't be enough.

Z

2016-04-28 17:02 GMT+02:00 Matthew Miller <mattdm(a)fedoraproject.org&gt;:
>  Bikeshedding on the name welcome, but here's the concept:
>
>  Right now, we have the main Fedora brand, which as the guidelines stand
>  generally applies to the main Fedora operating system distribution and
>  to our core activities. And we have the Fedora Remix brand, which is
>  very clearly for work _outside_ of Fedora Proper.
>
>  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".
>
>  What do you think?
>
>
>  --
>  Matthew Miller
>  <mattdm(a)fedoraproject.org&gt;
>  Fedora Project Leader
>  _______________________________________________
>  council-discuss mailing list
>  council-discuss(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>  Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
>  http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/[e-mail]...
>
>  The Fedora Project's mission is to lead the advancement of free and
>  open source software and content as a collaborative community. 


-- 
PGP:  06853DF7

[Joe Brockmeier]

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"? Who are the mentors in this
example? (Mentors are a key part of the incubator for Apache.)

Best,

jzb
-- 
Joe Brockmeier | Community Team, OSAS
jzb(a)redhat.com | http://community.redhat.com/
Twitter: @jzb  | http://dissociatedpress.net/

[Josh Boyer]

On Thu, Apr 28, 2016 at 2:19 PM, Joe Brockmeier <jzb(a)redhat.com&gt; 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? 
IMO, no.

>  2) I like the idea, but an example project might help illustrate
> here. 
Agreed, though I have some of my own ideas.

>  3) 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.

josh

[Matthew Miller]

On Thu, Apr 28, 2016 at 03:45:31PM -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
>  > 3) 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. 
Yeah, excellent point.

>  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 agree. Which I guess means "incubator" is the wrong word.

-- 
Matthew Miller
<mattdm(a)fedoraproject.org&gt;
Fedora Project Leader

[Jaroslav Reznik]

On Thu, Apr 28, 2016 at 8:19 PM, Joe Brockmeier <jzb(a)redhat.com&gt; 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...

Jaroslav

> Who are the mentors in this
>  example? (Mentors are a key part of the incubator for Apache.)
>
>  Best,
>
>  jzb
>  --
>  Joe Brockmeier | Community Team, OSAS
>  jzb(a)redhat.com | http://community.redhat.com/
>  Twitter: @jzb  | http://dissociatedpress.net/
>
>
>  _______________________________________________
>  council-discuss mailing list
>  council-discuss(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>  Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
>  http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/[e-mail]...
>
>  The Fedora Project's mission is to lead the advancement of free and
>  open source software and content as a collaborative community. 


-- 
Jaroslav Řezník <jreznik(a)redhat.com&gt;
Engineering Program Manager

Office: [phone]
Mobile: [phone]
PIN: REZZABBM
Red Hat, Inc.                               http://www.redhat.com/

[Stephen Gallagher]

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&gt; 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).

[Kevin Fenzi]

On Thu, 28 Apr 2016 11:02:42 -0400
Matthew Miller <mattdm(a)fedoraproject.org&gt; wrote:

>  Bikeshedding on the name welcome, but here's the concept:
>  
>  Right now, we have the main Fedora brand, which as the guidelines
>  stand generally applies to the main Fedora operating system
>  distribution and to our core activities. And we have the Fedora Remix
>  brand, which is very clearly for work _outside_ of Fedora Proper.
>  
>  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".
>  
>  What do you think? 
Might be worth doing. There's something we have been discussing in
infrastructure that seems related to this: namely how we communicate
the support level or 'officialness' of a service. 

The current proposal is to use domain names to do this, ie, if it's
fedoraproject.org it's a fully supported official service, if it's
fedorainfracloud its less official and supported, and if it's
fedoracommunity.org it's something that the community is
providing with no particular support. There would likely be some other
domains involved, but this would allow us to use our current RFR
(request for resources) process for "official" services, but allow
other services to use other processes that are lower barrier, etc. 

Then if later some fedoracommunity service turned out popular/useful,
it could graduate to a fully supported service, or in turn some
currently official service could move out to a fedoracommunity service
and if no one helped support it eventually go away. 

kevin

[Matthias Runge]

On 28/04/16 10:02, Matthew Miller wrote:
>  Bikeshedding on the name welcome, but here's the concept:
>  
>  Right now, we have the main Fedora brand, which as the guidelines stand
>  generally applies to the main Fedora operating system distribution and
>  to our core activities. And we have the Fedora Remix brand, which is
>  very clearly for work _outside_ of Fedora Proper.
>  
>  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".
>  
>  What do you think?
>  
>   
Would that give initiatives a home, which are currently not really
allowed in Fedora, like (just to name a few)

- pidora
- packaging initiatives, with stuff  e.g in copr or which are not
currently accepted in fedora repositories?
- building a robot and providing software for it based on fedora (I
mean, including everything, not only the software packages, but also
building instructions etc: this clearly outside of being software

Do you mean like that?

Best,
Matthias

[Josh Boyer]

On Thu, Apr 28, 2016 at 3:13 PM, Matthias Runge
<mrunge(a)matthias-runge.de&gt; wrote:
>  On 28/04/16 10:02, Matthew Miller wrote:
> > Bikeshedding on the name welcome, but here's the concept:
> >
> > Right now, we have the main Fedora brand, which as the guidelines stand
> > generally applies to the main Fedora operating system distribution and
> > to our core activities. And we have the Fedora Remix brand, which is
> > very clearly for work _outside_ of Fedora Proper.
> >
> > 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".
> >
> > What do you think?
> >
> >
>  Would that give initiatives a home, which are currently not really
>  allowed in Fedora, like (just to name a few) 
My personal take on your examples below.

>  - pidora 
This one is probably not a good example.  It's too large to leverage
the resources we have (it's an entirely separate arch) and it depends
on code that is not upstream.

>  - packaging initiatives, with stuff  e.g in copr or which are not
>  currently accepted in fedora repositories? 
Possibly?  The standard issues around the ever present codec
situations would still apply, so it won't solve that.  It could be
useful for other things.

>  - building a robot and providing software for it based on fedora (I
>  mean, including everything, not only the software packages, but also
>  building instructions etc: this clearly outside of being software 
Neat!

josh