On 12/06/2012 07:00 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:

On Wed, 2012-12-05 at 22:25 -0600, Michael Ekstrand wrote:

On 12/05/2012 03:06 PM, Bill Nottingham wrote:

Matthew Miller (mattdm@fedoraproject.org) said:

Three things:

1) Fedora is big enough that we have concrete situations where one size
    doesn't fit all. Puppet being broken on F17 (and probably F18 as well)
    is a fine example of something within the distro itself. And, as a
    platform for development, offering more version choices to our users
    would be a strength.

<heretical>

Well, then maybe Fedora's too big, and we should move to a model where
Fedora is much smaller, and the grand Fedora universe contains things that
are packaged *for* one or multiple Fedoras.

</heretical>

FWIW (probably not much), I also think this is a great idea.  It feels
strange to me that the same thing contains & manages everything from
base system (e.g. kernel through core GNOME stack) and add-on apps (say
Battle for Wesnoth, to pick a relatively obvious example).

Now, there's a bike shed to be painted over where the lines should be drawn.

We could draw them between Core and Extras!

So what if we actually do .. but in a different way - eg. we would ensure that we have stable API, no feature breakage in a release for a package that do belong to "core" and allow faster turnaround for packages in "extras" .. it's not like locking it down as it used to be but defining more strict rules for certain set of packages.