Seven Reasons to Upgrade to Fedora 13
By Joe 'Zonker' Brockmeier
Fedora 13 is right around the corner. Code-named "Goddard," the Fedora
13 release sports tons of updates from Fedora 12 and some really
exciting new features that will have Linux power users running for their
CD burners. You'll find everything from better printer support to
experimental 3D support for Nvidia cards and filesystem rollback. Ready
to roll up your sleeves? Let's take a look at the best of Fedora 13.
Fedora's focus is slightly different than Ubuntu, openSUSE and some
other Linux distributions. The project is focused on
<http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Foundations> emphasizing software freedom
and being first to innovate and ship new features. While Fedora isn't
the most polished Linux distro you'll find, it's one of the most
exciting to use. If you're on Fedora 12, we've got seven reasons you
should be thinking about upgrading to Fedora 13 now or when it's
officially released late this month.
Oh My Goddard! An Early Look at Fedora 13
Fedora 13 is on the way and while it innovates in its own right, it also
borrows some major features from other distros such as Ubuntu and
Mandriva. This is looking to be yet another great release from the
By Christopher Smart
It might not have as much bling
<http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/bling> as Ubuntu, but Fedora
still has a lot to offer. While the former focuses primarily on making
life easier for new users (and generally does a great job at that),
Fedora has been concentrating on the underlying technology and making
the best possible entirely free operating system.
The effort that the community continues to put into each and every day
truly makes for great, feature-full releases. To you we must say thank
you - we appreciate all of your hard work! If you’re a user who’s never
tried Fedora, why not give this exciting new release a try? It might not
have as much bling as Ubuntu, but it’s a rock solid release based on the
best free software has to offer.
As you might already know, I wrote a blog post for Buzz the other
day and it gained around 109 clicks from Identi.ca and Twitter,
as well as many views from Fedora planet. We got some feedback on the
post and the main points were as follows:
* Buzz isn't all that great of a name for it.
* OpenMarketing as a proposed name for the platform (from Gerard)
* Similar to KDE Buzz and we should take a look at what they're doing
(was someone working on seeing whether the code for that was open?)
but it's sufficiently different to warrant a new piece of software.
* Marketing about marketing is a good thing!
What do you think of these?
There are some things that I would really like to get decided
relatively quickly so the design of the actual system can begin:
1. Technology - Should this be pursued in Moksha or using PHP. I'm
leaning quite a lot towards just using PHP at the moment because it
will save drastic amounts of time learning how to use another
framework and I'm more comfortable with it.
2. Name - I like OpenMarketing for the platform, but maybe we should
change the Fedora-specific app's name from Buzz to something else.
Other considerations include design. I'm not a designer by any
capacity so I guess I can just create a simple front-end for it to
start off with and then when we have something to show maybe we can
get one of the Fedora designers to have a look at it?
Thanks and I hope I'm not being too verbose,
> Like with our initial methodology to create the survey questions
> based on longer phone interviews with a dozen participants, followed
> up my shorter email interviews with several dozen participants, and
> then pilot testing with specific subgroups in the community, we will
> be doing something similar with the results. That is, we will email
> preliminary results to select participants (and subsequently groups
> of participants) for feedback and input before distributing the
> report to all survey respondents (and others who may be interested).
> Tony and I would welcome early input from you and the marketing team
> in mid-June when we expect to have a draft/executive summary ready.
Thanks for the update, Jonathon - it's particularly enlightening for
those of us without an academic background (such as myself) who might be
curious as to what goes on behind the scenes of this sort of research.
:) Looking forward to the update in mid-June as to how we can help!
This email is regarding the Keyword Optimization Project:
Below are my recommendations for three pages, which are currently void of
optimization for any keywords or phrases:
*Suggested Keyword:* Fedora Linux
*Targeted Term:* Linux
*Global Monthly Search Volume for Target Term:* 55.6 Million
*Keyword:* Fedora Linux Download
*Targeted Term:* Linux Download
*Global Monthly Search Volume for Targeted Term:* 1.2 Million
*Keyword:* Fedora Linux How To Get Help
*Targeted Term:* Linux How To
*Global Monthly Search Volume for Targeted Term:* 1 Million
Please let me know if you all have any questions or objections! :)
URL is the page I recommend placing the keyword on.
Keyword is the term I recommend we optimize the page for.
Targeted Term is the keyword or phrase I am targeting as a result of the
Global Monthly Search Volume is the approximate average monthly number of
search queries matching each keyword result. This statistic applies to
searches performed on Google and their Search Network over a 12-month
Garland Binns: Fedora Project Contributor
Email: gbinns(a)fedoraproject.org | GPG: 236ABB13
Phone: (646) 867-2335 | Fax: (877) 329-3410
I've read all the messages in this list concerning the topic "Fedora
Project em Português". I want to thank all the good suggestions made by
everyone, specially those made by Paul W. Frields and Rodrigo Padula.
I want to clarify that I'm a co-coordinator of the Tranlation Portuguese
Team. Not the leader :).
I just want to add that we do have a small team for now. So, our
strategy was to concentrate our efforts on the materials used by the
non-tec everyday user in his everyday tasks. This excludes, for now,
many sysadmin and translator stuff. We were forgetting the wiki pages.
Just recently have we finished the main website , but our translation
does not appear to us. We receive pt_BR no matter how we configure our
browser. That's a strange behavior and I already file a bug report  .
I have checked all the "*pt*" pages in the wiki, and there's a lot os
stuff in "Pt_BR" (congrats guys) and not so much in "Pt": one important,
one to review and one to delete.
Taking in consideration that Transifex and the websites already use the
"pt" form, if nobody objects, I choose this format, as suggested by Rodrigo.
I will add "[[Category:pt]]" to all the pages reviewed and created.
Is this acceptable?
I'm sending this to the translation and infrastructure lists, for review.
Thanks for your time.
 - http://fedoraproject.org/
 - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=588701
 - https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-infrastructure/ticket/2133
O Software Livre não é apenas software. É também uma
filosofia de vida. Aprenda mais sobre este assunto em
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/ e liberte-se.
On 05/19/2010 11:39 AM, Chris wrote:
> I think it's fantastic Fedora has that page, it's a great example of
> the projects transparency. The main concern I tried to convey in the
> review, is I'm concerned Fedora has a unique kind of new Linux user
> finding them. This user, who just for this example, is someone who's
> maybe a IT guy who just got tasked with a bunch of RHEL servers and
> wants to jump into Desktop Linux to learn. He's going to search for
> Red Hat's desktop Linux, and eventually will come to find the Fedora
> project. His first impressions of Fedora will be his impressions of
> desktop Linux. So whatever Fedora gets right, or wrong, has a very
> specific type of important new eye looking at it - despite what the
> project's personal user base target might be.
As you are already aware, Red Hat does invest very heavily on desktop
technologies and has a Red Hat Desktop product. While Red Hat as a
sponsor of the Fedora has significant influence, Fedora a project can
and does have different goals from Red Hat and with the help of
governing communities like the Fedora Board has set its own direction.
We are transparent about our goals and focus which is different from
being a end user desktop product. We are focussed on free and open
source software. Aside from that, the legal restrictions around being a
US based entity involves having to deal with the unfortunate situation
of software patents. Taking all this into consideration, I think it
would be better to hold us up against what we focus on and evaluate how
well we do. Not every distribution has the same focus and goals and we
cannot fit a square peg into a round hole. I personally use Fedora as
my desktop for the last several but us technical users of course have
different expectations from a typical consumer. One of the things, that
came up in your show and something that the desktop team has discussed
is including some content by default on the desktop so it is even more
obvious what we do and do not do within Fedora.
> Totally makes sense, and I think we said as much on the show about it
> being a Live CD. Our focus on Btrfs is because that's what
> the audience is very excited about, that's what desktop Linux really
> care about. It's what Fedora 13 is going to be known for. At least
> until the version of Fedora that ships with it as the default. :-)
Btrfs being the default is some ways away. Red Hat has a full time
developer working on stabilizing the filesystem and we will get there
when it is ready. Meanwhile, we have been working on several features
related to Btrfs. I recommend downloading a non-live image, passing
btrfs as a option during installation and try it out. Take a look at
the yum plugin we have included as well. More details at
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Btrfs_in_Fedora_13. I look forward to a
review on that.
> I do, and it looks good. I still find telling your users to go Google
> their problem is a bit tacky. It seems to come from a inherent bias
> against even wanting to support or enable the user to acquire the
> codecs on their own terms. I find it so odd when a brilliant community
> all about openness, self starting, and sharing acts this way. In my
> view, your making a platform to enable them to create and enjoy
> content on their computer as part of a normal function of a desktop
> I'm not even saying you must do more, I think a link to the FAQ, and
> the third party repos (sans that warning you axed) is sufficient. I
> think you -could- do more if you really wanted to, ala give CodecBuddy
> some love and better integration with media apps, etc etc.
I will have to ask Linux Action Show to assume good will on our part.
We of course want to help users and replaced Codec Buddy with a
distribution independent PackageKit codec plugin that uses Gstreamer to
find and enable codecs. If you enable a repo with additional codecs,
PackageKit will find it with the right integration in place but enabling
additional repos is NOT a technical problem. It is a legal issue. Red
Hat being a successful and profitable US entity is subject to certain
restrictions and higher risks that other distributions might not have.
As I already explained in the software patents page, we simply cannot
link to third party codecs and provide specific details. Our legal team
tells us that we might face contributory infringement charges and just
cannot take that risk. I am not a lawyer and cannot talk on behalf of
Red Hat but you would note that this risk is not theoretical anymore.
Red Hat only a couple of weeks back won a patent case filed against it
after years of fighting through court. If we can do anything more, we
certainly will. Now that I have explained the limitations we have, I
hope you read the page completely and let us know if you have any
suggestions on what we can do better.
> That's really cool, I'd love to cover that on LAS, I'll starting
> following that asap. I noticed the mock ups and demos were down, I'd
> love to have a chance to see those.
The project was dormant for quite sometime and it has picked up some
interest recently. The basic idea is that package installation is
different from application installation and we need to provide different
interfaces to cover different use cases. PackageKit currently has a
pretty good interface for managing packages but not so much for handling
applications and Richard Hughes from Red Hat, developer of PackageKit is
working on a different UI for that. One big benefit from our work on
this is that whatever we do on top of PackageKit will remain
distribution independent and can be easily adopted by other
distributions. That's one of the things we place a high value on.
> Thank you, if it's ok with you, will cover your points on the next
Absolutely. If you have questions or concerns before the next show and
need some answers, do feel free to get in touch with me or press AT
I would like to draw attention to the survey that was administered by
the professors at Duke university over a month ago. I believe that this
survey should shed some light on the contributions and the various
priorities and methods which Fedora contributors define as their needs
and interests. This, in turn, should give a good basis to start from so
the data can be used to brand and market Fedora properly, as well as,
help build a better way for administration and governance of the
project. Eventually, if used properly, it can also provide the basis for
the community to avoid and reduce the growing conflicts that lead to
many contributors leaving the project.
So, in short, do we have any results for this survey?
Furthermore, do we have a methodology to accompany this survey to show
why these questions were asked and why the specific target groups were
chosen to survey?
Gregory M. Zysk
Fedora Ambassador EMEA