Please note that Fedora is meant for the early adopters, enthusiasts,
developers. An increased amount of cluefulness should be assumed.
Especially with these user groups, getting feedback (e.g. bug reports that
can be understood) is critical -- because you don't typically get bug
reports (except maybe through official support channels, which don't exist
for Fedora) otherwise.
You need a really huge testing/feedback group to find problem areas for
the source code included in Fedora. So I really think it is bad if
you want to limit the number of people using it or want to reduce it.
Look at how Alan Cox with his -ac kernels is "listening" to a large
crowd of users and can say "that specific driver probably has problems
on some hardware revisions, I get a few more complains than usual".
Wouldn't he be more productive by not providing his kernels to a that
However, what I do object to is getting into the state where we
translations to be one of the number one priorities in this particular
It is an important goal of Fedora to increase the number of contributing
developers. You have been a very active contributor to RHL in the past and
I hope you find Fedora and how it will evolve even more useful. We still
need more infrastructure to allow this, not just mailinglists about
"please update OO for me". But don't assume that kind of feedback is not
useful, as Fedora contains a really huge source base and that needs
a huge crowd of people who use it.
Similar thing is our bugzilla. Is it swamped with "it does not work but I
don't give you details" and "please give me the newest version this week,
I have seen it on some website"? But it also contains lots of reports
that can be immediately used by developers to improve Fedora, without even
using all the corner cases of the source code yourself or even knowing about
Florian La Roche