a call to action [Fwd: LWN headline: Blame Fedora = High Praise]

[Karsten Wade]

In the article referenced below there is an (implied) call to action for
Fedora:

"One might well wonder why certain Fedora users feel the need to repeat
these complaints so often. Perhaps the project is not doing an adequate
job of communicating what it is trying to do. One assumes that, if
people understood what Fedora is, they would not complain about it not
being something it can never be."

Is this true?

What are we doing to get this message out?

What can we do better?

Etc.

I can blog all I want, but if it's only the choir who is reading, then
what?

-------- Forwarded Message --------
From: Matt Domsch <matt(a)domsch.com&gt;

    Check out LWN.net for today's weekly edition.  Subscribers (and I do 
encourage folks to subscribe) will find it interesting.  Non-subscribers 
should look at this:
http://lwn.net/SubscriberLink/230042/5181766fe793aa6b/


-- 
Karsten Wade, RHCE, 108 Editor    ^     Fedora Documentation Project 
 Sr. Developer Relations Mgr.     |  fedoraproject.org/wiki/DocsProject
   quaid.108.redhat.com           |          gpg key: AD0E0C41
////////////////////////////////// \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

[Marc Wiriadisastra]

On Wed, 2007-04-11 at 19:23 -0700, Karsten Wade wrote:
>  In the article referenced below there is an (implied) call to action
> for
>  Fedora:
>  
>  "One might well wonder why certain Fedora users feel the need to repeat
>  these complaints so often. Perhaps the project is not doing an adequate
>  job of communicating what it is trying to do. One assumes that, if
>  people understood what Fedora is, they would not complain about it not
>  being something it can never be."
>  
>  Is this true?
>  
>  What are we doing to get this message out?
>  
>  What can we do better?
>  
>  Etc.
>  
>  I can blog all I want, but if it's only the choir who is reading, then
>  what?
>  
>  -------- Forwarded Message --------
>  From: Matt Domsch <matt(a)domsch.com&gt;
>  
>      Check out LWN.net for today's weekly edition.  Subscribers (and I do 
>  encourage folks to subscribe) will find it interesting.  Non-subscribers 
>  should look at this:
>  http://lwn.net/SubscriberLink/230042/5181766fe793aa6b/
>  
>  
>  - 
I think we spread the word enough its just people choose not to listen.
Without actually placing it on their desktop and making a user click 'I
understand this contains no propietary software' I don't know what else
needs to be done.

Is there enough information relating to fedora as to how to bypass the
propietary codecs etc.. and use open source alternatives?

Regards,

Marc

[Matthew Miller]

On Thu, Apr 12, 2007 at 10:44:13AM +0800, Marc Wiriadisastra wrote:
>  I think we spread the word enough its just people choose not to
> listen.
>  Without actually placing it on their desktop and making a user click 'I
>  understand this contains no propietary software' I don't know what else
>  needs to be done. 
Can we also make them click "I wouldn't be installing this distribution if I
didn't want to upgrade it at least every other release, now would I?"

-- 
Matthew Miller           mattdm(a)mattdm.org          <http://mattdm.org/>
Boston University Linux      ------>              <http://linux.bu.edu/>

[Karsten Wade]

On Thu, 2007-04-12 at 10:44 +0800, Marc Wiriadisastra wrote:

>  I think we spread the word enough its just people choose not to
> listen.
>  Without actually placing it on their desktop and making a user click 'I
>  understand this contains no propietary software' I don't know what else
>  needs to be done. 
Codec Buddy is a great step/improvement here.  I like the idea of
confronting the situation head-on, proactively.  Pages on the Wiki and
pointing at them after someone complains is reactive.

Now I want a t-shirt that says:

"Fedora - protect yourself from mental slavery"

>  Is there enough information relating to fedora as to how to bypass
> the
>  propietary codecs etc.. and use open source alternatives? 
Nope.  What can we do for people?  What can we offer them that is
useful?

* Hosted app that converts FOO format into Ogg
* More original content in Ogg format
* Cross-platform Ogg playing from Firefox
* Approach recording artists who might be sympathetic (sort of like Cory
Doctorow is for writing)
* Others?

- Karsten
-- 
Karsten Wade, RHCE, 108 Editor    ^     Fedora Documentation Project 
 Sr. Developer Relations Mgr.     |  fedoraproject.org/wiki/DocsProject
   quaid.108.redhat.com           |          gpg key: AD0E0C41
////////////////////////////////// \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

[Jonathan Roberts]

>  Nope.  What can we do for people?  What can we offer them that is
>  useful?
>
>  * More original content in Ogg format 
There's already *loads* of original content in Ogg, maybe Fedora could
point them in the direction of some of it? Magnatune, Jamendo etc...I
thought the new default home page in FC6 was a great step in the right
direction and it could possibly be extended to include this sort of
information.

>  * Cross-platform Ogg playing from Firefox 
That would be awesome :D

>  * Approach recording artists who might be sympathetic (sort of like
> Cory
>  Doctorow is for writing) 
People like Barenaked Ladies you'd think would be interested, who even
released their latest album on Amie Street.

Like you were all saying though, I'm not sure what more Fedora can do
to make it's objectives clear, will keep thinking...

Jon

[Rahul Sundaram]

Jonathan Roberts wrote:
> > Nope.  What can we do for people?  What can we offer them that
> is
> > useful?
> >
> > * More original content in Ogg format
>  
>  There's already *loads* of original content in Ogg, maybe Fedora could
>  point them in the direction of some of it? Magnatune, Jamendo etc...I
>  thought the new default home page in FC6 was a great step in the right
>  direction and it could possibly be extended to include this sort of
>  information. 
We already are planning to.

http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/7/Bookmarks

Rahul

[Jonathan Roberts]

On 12/04/07, Rahul Sundaram <sundaram(a)fedoraproject.org&gt; wrote:
>  Jonathan Roberts wrote:
>  >> Nope.  What can we do for people?  What can we offer them that is
>  >> useful?
>  >>
>  >> * More original content in Ogg format
>  >
>  > There's already *loads* of original content in Ogg, maybe Fedora could
>  > point them in the direction of some of it? Magnatune, Jamendo etc...I
>  > thought the new default home page in FC6 was a great step in the right
>  > direction and it could possibly be extended to include this sort of
>  > information.
>
>  We already are planning to.
>
>  http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/7/Bookmarks
>  
Looks cool :D I was wondering about putting a link directly on the
home page perhaps?! Or is that outside of the plans for the homepage?
Just thought it would give them the greatest possible encouragement to
discover all the free content that is out there and can be enjoyed in
ogg etc...

Jon
>  Rahul
>
>  --
>  Fedora-marketing-list mailing list
>  Fedora-marketing-list(a)redhat.com
>  https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-marketing-list
>

[Rahul Sundaram]

Jonathan Roberts wrote:

>  
>  Looks cool :D I was wondering about putting a link directly on the
>  home page perhaps?! Or is that outside of the plans for the homepage? 
I think so.

Rahul

[Karsten Wade]

On Thu, 2007-04-12 at 22:53 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
>  Jonathan Roberts wrote:
>  
>  > 
>  > Looks cool :D I was wondering about putting a link directly on the
>  > home page perhaps?! Or is that outside of the plans for the homepage?
>  
>  I think so. 
I can see pros and cons.  If you want to pursue this, propose some ideas
on fedora-docs-list and we'll discuss.

- Karsten
-- 
Karsten Wade, RHCE, 108 Editor    ^     Fedora Documentation Project 
 Sr. Developer Relations Mgr.     |  fedoraproject.org/wiki/DocsProject
   quaid.108.redhat.com           |          gpg key: AD0E0C41
////////////////////////////////// \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

[Peter Gordon]

Karsten Wade wrote:
>  Codec Buddy is a great step/improvement here.  I like the idea of
>  confronting the situation head-on, proactively.  Pages on the Wiki and
>  pointing at them after someone complains is reactive. 
Agreed. It's a nice way of getting legal support for these things should the
user opt for them, while still keeping the Fedora as-is Free.

>  * More original content in Ogg format 
This part is simple enough, as recent Rhythmbox releases now feature built-in
support for the Magnatune music store and Jamendo CC-licensed music library.
AmaroK has a similar Magnatune plugin, as I recall.
--
Peter Gordon (codergeek42)
This message was sent through a webmail
    interface, and thus not signed.

[Robert M. Albrecht]

Hi,

>  Agreed. It's a nice way of getting legal support for these things
> should the
>  user opt for them, while still keeping the Fedora as-is Free. 
Perhaps this could be expanded in some way.

If Fedora finds any unsupported hardware it could display a dialog
informing the user:

- device class and vendor
- link to vendors homepage
- vendors contact to click (thus launching the email client) and ask for
linux-support (pre-filled email-text ?)
- link to fedoras wiki for explaning
	a) why this happened (binary only firmware, ...)
	b) instructions to get it running

cu romal

[Bryan Smith]

On Sun, 2007-04-15 at 22:30 +0200, Robert M. Albrecht wrote:
>  Perhaps this could be expanded in some way.
>  If Fedora finds any unsupported hardware it could display a dialog
>  informing the user:
>  - device class and vendor
>  - link to vendors homepage
>  - vendors contact to click (thus launching the email client) and ask for
>  linux-support (pre-filled email-text ?)
>  - link to fedoras wiki for explaning
>  	a) why this happened (binary only firmware, ...)
>  	b) instructions to get it running 
Considering the PCI (among other) Vendor IDs are fixed and known, this
is feasible.

I have to give a third "thumbs up" on this approach.  Empower the user.
Don't lecture the user, empower the user.  Excellent idea all around.


-- 
Bryan J. Smith         Professional, Technical Annoyance
mailto:[e-mail]   http://thebs413.blogspot.com
--------------------------------------------------------
        Fission Power:  An Inconvenient Solution

[Rahul Sundaram]

Robert M. Albrecht wrote:
>  Hi,
>  
> > Agreed. It's a nice way of getting legal support for these things should the
> > user opt for them, while still keeping the Fedora as-is Free.
>  
>  Perhaps this could be expanded in some way.
>  
>  If Fedora finds any unsupported hardware it could display a dialog
>  informing the user:
>  
>  - device class and vendor
>  - link to vendors homepage
>  - vendors contact to click (thus launching the email client) and ask for
>  linux-support (pre-filled email-text ?)
>  - link to fedoras wiki for explaning
>  	a) why this happened (binary only firmware, ...)
>  	b) instructions to get it running 
I did suggest something very similar at 
https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-advisory-board/2007-March/msg00139...
Apparently there isn't much traction to this idea.

Rahul

[Bryan Smith]

On Thu, 2007-04-19 at 01:43 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
>  I did suggest something very similar at 
>  https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-advisory-board/2007-March/msg00139...
>  Apparently there isn't much traction to this idea. 
I read through the thread and I didn't get that idea at all.
In fact, the idea I got was more confusion than anything.
I.e., people are reading the problem in different ways.

What I advocate, and I believe several others here are advocating, is
that we offer a _minimal_ amount of information.

E.g., 

1)  You cross-reference the PCI/USB/etc... Vendor ID to a name, possibly
also spit out the product name.  That informs the user.

2)  If the Device ID is a known, binary-only issue that Fedora cannot
redistribute, inform the user that these drivers do not come with
Fedora, and a Bugzilla entry should _not_ be filed for support.

In fact, #2 would _also_ have the added bonus of addressing the endless
number of bug reports being filed -- something one person explicitly
complained about in that thread.


-- 
Bryan J. Smith         Professional, Technical Annoyance
mailto:[e-mail]   http://thebs413.blogspot.com
--------------------------------------------------------
        Fission Power:  An Inconvenient Solution

[Rahul Sundaram]

Bryan J. Smith wrote:
>  On Thu, 2007-04-19 at 01:43 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> > I did suggest something very similar at 
> > https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-advisory-board/2007-March/msg00139...
> > Apparently there isn't much traction to this idea.
>  
>  I read through the thread and I didn't get that idea at all.
>  In fact, the idea I got was more confusion than anything.
>  I.e., people are reading the problem in different ways. 
At any rate, we need people to implement it.

>  1)  You cross-reference the PCI/USB/etc... Vendor ID to a name,
> possibly
>  also spit out the product name.  That informs the user.
>  
>  2)  If the Device ID is a known, binary-only issue that Fedora cannot
>  redistribute, inform the user that these drivers do not come with
>  Fedora, and a Bugzilla entry should _not_ be filed for support.
>  
>  In fact, #2 would _also_ have the added bonus of addressing the endless
>  number of bug reports being filed -- something one person explicitly
>  complained about in that thread. 
Then there are two other related projects which might interest you.

https://hosted.fedoraproject.org/projects/LHCP/
https://hosted.fedoraproject.org/projects/smolt/wiki

Rahul

[Bryan Smith]

On Thu, 2007-04-19 at 08:00 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
>  At any rate, we need people to implement it. 
Understand exactly where you are coming from.  ;)

>  Then there are two other related projects which might interest you.
>  https://hosted.fedoraproject.org/projects/LHCP/
>  https://hosted.fedoraproject.org/projects/smolt/wiki 
I was aware of the LHCP, although I just now am putting 2 and 2
together.  Probably a great avenue for it.

I didn't know anything about Smolt.  Thanx for the link.


-- 
Bryan J. Smith         Professional, Technical Annoyance
mailto:[e-mail]   http://thebs413.blogspot.com
--------------------------------------------------------
        Fission Power:  An Inconvenient Solution

[Bryan Smith]

On Thu, 2007-04-12 at 10:44 +0800, Marc Wiriadisastra wrote:
>  I think we spread the word enough its just people choose not to
> listen.
>  Without actually placing it on their desktop and making a user click 'I
>  understand this contains no propietary software' I don't know what else
>  needs to be done.
>  Is there enough information relating to fedora as to how to bypass the
>  propietary codecs etc.. and use open source alternatives? 
I've been a very long-time Linux integrator, over 12 years -- the last 5
as a traveling consultant at major Fortune 100 companies -- and not just
merely for "web services" (which I avoid like the black plague because
so many people are doing it).  I've been deploying Linux workstations
(as much as backend/data center servers) since the mid-'90s.

So, first off, I'd _avoid_ even using the word "proprietary."  There is
both support for "proprietary" formats and even various, other
"proprietary" aspects to things included with Fedora too.  Also remember
that "proprietary" is not always a "bad word" to many people. 
I've even
argued that Microsoft solutions aren't "proprietary standards," because
that would require them to be maintained, which Microsoft does not.

Secondly, focus on the _real_aspects_ of Fedora, 100% redistribution
with 0% indemnification issues.  That's the _real_value_ of Fedora.
I've had to _confiscate_ various distros -- from select Knoppix Live CD
to many other Debian variants (although not _true_ Debian itself).  I
drive the point home -- these employees of my client are opening their
employer/my client to issues -- especially when it is redistributed by
the company.


-- 
Bryan J. Smith         Professional, Technical Annoyance
mailto:[e-mail]   http://thebs413.blogspot.com
--------------------------------------------------------
        Fission Power:  An Inconvenient Solution

[Sankarshan Mukhopadhyay]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Karsten Wade wrote:
>  In the article referenced below there is an (implied) call to action
> for
>  Fedora:
>  
>  "One might well wonder why certain Fedora users feel the need to repeat
>  these complaints so often. Perhaps the project is not doing an adequate
>  job of communicating what it is trying to do. One assumes that, if
>  people understood what Fedora is, they would not complain about it not
>  being something it can never be." 
I would tend to believe that is more the result of a tradeoff between
convenience and sticking to a distribution's moral and/or ethical
standpoint. For example, till the time Intel Graphics cards became the
flavor of the month the company was clubbed in the same evil circle as
NVidia or even ATI. But with time and sufficient effort invested by
Intel and the distributions, things have changed. This means that an
average home user can be asked to get a system that provides reasonable
bling and yet not have to install binary bl0bs to get them.

A tendency to howl in pain saying "Fedora sucks" had been around since
the time the mp3 support was withdrawn. The "blame Fedora" is more to do
with "it works in F00 Distribution so why can't you". The only way to
counter this is perhaps keep on spreading the message through as many
means we can - blogs, Ambassadors being among the well trod ones.

:Sankarshan


- --

You see things; and you say 'Why?';
But I dream things that never were;
and I say 'Why not?' - George Bernard Shaw
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Red Hat - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
>
> iD8DBQFGHbHsXQZpNTcrCzMRAkinAKCUFFH/51693gsGORIWTvcgq8STpgCfX3lt
> 0MKia613huTeGT4MEngkj1I=
> =53KX
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[hymno]

2007/4/12, Sankarshan Mukhopadhyay <sankarshan.mukhopadhyay(a)gmail.com&gt;:
>  -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>  Hash: SHA1
>
>  Karsten Wade wrote:
>  > In the article referenced below there is an (implied) call to action for
>  > Fedora:
>  >
>  > "One might well wonder why certain Fedora users feel the need to repeat
>  > these complaints so often. Perhaps the project is not doing an adequate
>  > job of communicating what it is trying to do. One assumes that, if
>  > people understood what Fedora is, they would not complain about it not
>  > being something it can never be."
>
>  I would tend to believe that is more the result of a tradeoff between
>  convenience and sticking to a distribution's moral and/or ethical
>  standpoint. For example, till the time Intel Graphics cards became the
>  flavor of the month the company was clubbed in the same evil circle as
>  NVidia or even ATI. But with time and sufficient effort invested by
>  Intel and the distributions, things have changed. This means that an
>  average home user can be asked to get a system that provides reasonable
>  bling and yet not have to install binary bl0bs to get them.
>
>  A tendency to howl in pain saying "Fedora sucks" had been around since
>  the time the mp3 support was withdrawn. The "blame Fedora" is more to do
>  with "it works in F00 Distribution so why can't you". The only way to
>  counter this is perhaps keep on spreading the message through as many
>  means we can - blogs, Ambassadors being among the well trod ones.
>
>  :Sankarshan 

Some people are ready for Fedora/Linux, others just want an alternative for
Windows.
I can't understand why people keep *demanding* things like binary blobs to
work out of the box.
Let's tell these people, this is free software. Are you ready for it? If
not, what are you complaining about?
Codec Buddy is more than enough.

Or is Fedora as desperate as Ubuntu to get as many users it can possibly
have?
I don't think/hope so.
And I don't think Fedora will benefit from that.

Yes, I admit, I did install Flash 9 on my F7 test 3 machine.
Suprisingly, Firefox 2 now installs, even on Linux, Flash 9 when you click
on the "missing plugin - download plugin" button. I tried that just to
check, and it even worked.
No way to escape the proprietary anyway. ;)
So let the users install whatever they want on their systems, as long as
Fedora can be 'shipped' as 100% free (as in speech) software.


rgrdz, Herman

[Bryan Smith]

On Thu, 2007-04-12 at 09:43 +0530, Sankarshan Mukhopadhyay wrote:
>  I would tend to believe that is more the result of a tradeoff
> between
>  convenience and sticking to a distribution's moral and/or ethical
>  standpoint. For example, till the time Intel Graphics cards became the
>  flavor of the month the company was clubbed in the same evil circle as
>  NVidia or even ATI. But with time and sufficient effort invested by
>  Intel and the distributions, things have changed. This means that an
>  average home user can be asked to get a system that provides reasonable
>  bling and yet not have to install binary bl0bs to get them. 

I've been the first person to _defend_ Red Hat's stance on Fedora,
including Red Hat's _right_ to _refuse_ to support closed source
drivers.  It's not an option, as I've explained to many people.  I've
been long-labeled a "Red Hat apologist," all the way back to the GLibC 2
change in Red Hat Linux 5, but even more so on the Red Hat(R) trademark,
creation of Fedora(TM), the reason for RHEL and its SLA focus, etc...

The context of "evil" is part of the problem.  There is "being
active"
-- that's good -- and then there's "being an activst" -- that's
bad.
The latter often causes unnecessary labeling, sometimes quite
inaccurately too.

So Fedora advocates should _not_ throw around the "evil" word.  It not
only sells Fedora wrong, but it shows _ignorance_ in some cases.
Especially for those of us who were involved with the "great Linux
migration" in the EDA/CAM (among other) software industries circa
1997-1999 (long story).  I myself am an engineer who has worked with
many engineers from ATI, Real3D (now Intel), nVidia and many others, and
it's quite frustrating when Fedora advocates don't state factual
information, and look utterly _ignorant_.

Understand, Intel _still_ keeps much of its IP closed, and not available
in their Linux support.  This includes some key, kernel-memory aspects
for their GPUs.  What they've finally done is found a way to provide
elementary OpenGL support without touching that IP.  Unfortunately, some
of those missing components prevent many titles from running.  And no,
I'm not talking about games, but some serious, critical Linux
applications.

Furthermore, as I've regularly had to point out, ATI and nVidia can't
release some of their source code because the IP is held by a 3rd party
-- including IP of Intel itself (which it doesn't include in its
drivers).  nVidia tried several things in the late '90s, including
release of the _full_source_code_ of both their kernel-memory driver and
GLX user-space.  And nVidia was summarily sent "cease'n desist" letters
from several companies, Microsoft, SGI and, yes, even Intel.

What nVidia has decided to do since has been so mis-represented and
mis-contrude, I just ignore many people nowdays.  This includes the fact
that many people say nVidia produces proprietary chipsets, when their
chipset peripheral support has been one of the best in Linux, period.
Heck, even their 2D feature support is probably the best in XFree/Xorg
too, including how many engineers they put on it.  On 3D, they finally
got sick of the "IP minefield," especially since trying to produce open
source drivers (which Intel has finally) would result in many titles
_not_working_.  Even Intel is violating many aspects of IP, because
OpenGL is a major issue.

And despite popular belief, ATI _never_ released 3D drivers, that was
Precision Insight who developed GLX drivers for the ATI R100 (Radeon
7500-8000 series) under contract with the National Weather Service.  And
they were (and still are) quite lacking.

Fedora advocates don't have to "bark back" to make a point.  They just
need to repeat, even like a broken record, "we product a 100%
redistributable distribution with 0% indemnification issues."  Leave it
at that, don't stoop to the "evil" moniker, especially when the
understanding is often from a standpoint of ignorance of real IP issues.

Just my $0.02 from a long-time Linux architect and consultant.  ;)



-- 
Bryan J. Smith         Professional, Technical Annoyance
mailto:[e-mail]   http://thebs413.blogspot.com
--------------------------------------------------------
        Fission Power:  An Inconvenient Solution

[Sankarshan Mukhopadhyay]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Bryan J. Smith wrote:

[snipping a very large and very well written bit]

>  Fedora advocates don't have to "bark back" to make a
> point.  They just
>  need to repeat, even like a broken record, "we product a 100%
>  redistributable distribution with 0% indemnification issues."   
Could not agree more

- --

You see things; and you say 'Why?';
But I dream things that never were;
and I say 'Why not?' - George Bernard Shaw
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Red Hat - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
>
> iD8DBQFGIt6GXQZpNTcrCzMRAoKUAKC9vHaV3yuRexFoJbBqncBvRjUjxgCeNoFf
> CZVsUTgAuBGDK9Fbd93rIpw=
> =nZFP
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----