5:56 a.m.
After reading a lot of pressreleases and surfing around reading papers
in magazines about fedora, I keep wondering what is Fedora? And
specifically what is fedora to the general pulic! Don't get me wrong,
I've known linux since before RedHat was born, and been a fedora user
since early pre fc1. Why do I raise this question then? Well the tought
that occurs to me is: is fedora a community driven project or is it a
Redhat EL playground. Today it is both.... But when you read
pressreleases and info about fedora in the papers, fedora do not stand
on its own. Many magazines writes similair to: "Fedora is the test
version of Red Hat Enterprise Linux" and to me that has the sound of a
product in development or in beta. Then there are magazines that
occationally get it right and talks about a community driven project,
and the next thing that occurs is you read a copyright notice. When
installing F10 you get a "Copyright © 2003-2008 RedHat, Inc. and others.
All rights reserved." Well there is the 'others' part... but it do not
have the sound of community, well others.... I'm not writing this as an
against RH thing, if it hadn't been for RH, 'the linux os' wouldn't
progressed to what it is today. I'm writing this because I think it is
not entirely clear what fedora is to the general public. This is
important to gain ground, to get the message out that fedora is not a
testbed product, but a product that incorporates new leading edge features.
Am I compleatly wrong or have anyone of you been asking the question,
what is fedora?
btw, F10 is king!
//J
6:11 a.m.
+1
On Thu, Nov 27, 2008 at 1:56 PM, Jonas Karlsson <jonas.karlsson(a)fxdev.com>wrote:
After reading a lot of pressreleases and surfing around reading papers in
magazines about fedora, I keep wondering what is Fedora? And specifically
what is fedora to the general pulic! Don't get me wrong, I've known linux
since before RedHat was born, and been a fedora user since early pre fc1.
Why do I raise this question then? Well the tought that occurs to me is: is
fedora a community driven project or is it a Redhat EL playground. Today it
is both.... But when you read pressreleases and info about fedora in the
papers, fedora do not stand on its own. Many magazines writes similair to:
"Fedora is the test version of Red Hat Enterprise Linux" and to me that has
the sound of a product in development or in beta. Then there are magazines
that occationally get it right and talks about a community driven project,
and the next thing that occurs is you read a copyright notice. When
installing F10 you get a "Copyright (c) 2003-2008 RedHat, Inc. and others. All
rights reserved." Well there is the 'others' part... but it do not have the
sound of community, well others.... I'm not writing this as an against RH
thing, if it hadn't been for RH, 'the linux os' wouldn't progressed to
what
it is today. I'm writing this because I think it is not entirely clear what
fedora is to the general public. This is important to gain ground, to get
the message out that fedora is not a testbed product, but a product that
incorporates new leading edge features.
Am I compleatly wrong or have anyone of you been asking the question, what
is fedora?
btw, F10 is king!
//J
--
Fedora-marketing-list mailing list
Fedora-marketing-list(a)redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-marketing-list
--
Saadaldine AlSaidi
IT Manager
AlShora International
Tayyouneh Rotary
Old Saida Road - Princess Buldg.
Beirut - Lebanon
Tel: +961 1 391140
Fax: +961 1 381140
Mob: +961 3 934285
5:04 a.m.
On Thu, Nov 27, 2008 at 12:56:59PM +0100, Jonas Karlsson wrote:
After reading a lot of pressreleases and surfing around reading papers
in magazines about fedora, I keep wondering what is Fedora? And
specifically what is fedora to the general pulic! Don't get me wrong,
I've known linux since before RedHat was born, and been a fedora user
since early pre fc1. Why do I raise this question then? Well the tought
that occurs to me is: is fedora a community driven project or is it a
Redhat EL playground. Today it is both.... But when you read
pressreleases and info about fedora in the papers, fedora do not stand
on its own. Many magazines writes similair to: "Fedora is the test
version of Red Hat Enterprise Linux" and to me that has the sound of a
product in development or in beta. Then there are magazines that
occationally get it right and talks about a community driven project,
and the next thing that occurs is you read a copyright notice. When
installing F10 you get a "Copyright © 2003-2008 RedHat, Inc. and others.
All rights reserved." Well there is the 'others' part... but it do not
have the sound of community, well others.... I'm not writing this as an
against RH thing, if it hadn't been for RH, 'the linux os' wouldn't
progressed to what it is today. I'm writing this because I think it is
not entirely clear what fedora is to the general public. This is
important to gain ground, to get the message out that fedora is not a
testbed product, but a product that incorporates new leading edge
features.
Am I compleatly wrong or have anyone of you been asking the question,
what is fedora?
Fedora is the way how Red Hat contribute to Open Source and Community.
-- Anton
5:33 a.m.
This is an important notice, and a very effective point of view. But when it
comes to debates and hot conversation regarding whether fedora is the
testing playground for Redhat Ent. or not, it becomes a weak point I guess.
But after all, nothing is truly free and to be honest fedora is one of the
most stable releases among open source Linux bases operating system.
Therefore, I usually tend to insure focusing on this point, "testing
playground", and finish its discussion before I go into explaining more
about fedora's features.
On Fri, Nov 28, 2008 at 1:04 PM, Anton Arapov <aarapov(a)fedoraproject.org>wrote:
On Thu, Nov 27, 2008 at 12:56:59PM +0100, Jonas Karlsson wrote:
>
> After reading a lot of pressreleases and surfing around reading papers
> in magazines about fedora, I keep wondering what is Fedora? And
> specifically what is fedora to the general pulic! Don't get me wrong,
> I've known linux since before RedHat was born, and been a fedora user
> since early pre fc1. Why do I raise this question then? Well the tought
> that occurs to me is: is fedora a community driven project or is it a
> Redhat EL playground. Today it is both.... But when you read
> pressreleases and info about fedora in the papers, fedora do not stand
> on its own. Many magazines writes similair to: "Fedora is the test
> version of Red Hat Enterprise Linux" and to me that has the sound of a
> product in development or in beta. Then there are magazines that
> occationally get it right and talks about a community driven project,
> and the next thing that occurs is you read a copyright notice. When
> installing F10 you get a "Copyright (c) 2003-2008 RedHat, Inc. and others.
> All rights reserved." Well there is the 'others' part... but it do not
> have the sound of community, well others.... I'm not writing this as an
> against RH thing, if it hadn't been for RH, 'the linux os' wouldn't
> progressed to what it is today. I'm writing this because I think it is
> not entirely clear what fedora is to the general public. This is
> important to gain ground, to get the message out that fedora is not a
> testbed product, but a product that incorporates new leading edge
> features.
>
> Am I compleatly wrong or have anyone of you been asking the question,
> what is fedora?
Fedora is the way how Red Hat contribute to Open Source and Community.
-- Anton
--
Fedora-marketing-list mailing list
Fedora-marketing-list(a)redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-marketing-list
--
Saadaldine AlSaidi
IT Manager
AlShora International
Tayyouneh Rotary
Old Saida Road - Princess Buldg.
Beirut - Lebanon
Tel: +961 1 391140
Fax: +961 1 381140
Mob: +961 3 934285
8:15 p.m.
On Thu, Nov 27, 2008 at 6:56 AM, Jonas Karlsson
<jonas.karlsson(a)fxdev.com> wrote:
Am I compleatly wrong or have anyone of you been asking the question,
what
is fedora?
So I'm on both sides of the fence - Fedora contributor and RHEL
customer (as I suspect that many of us are). And the question does
come up a lot, so here's my "stock response":
Fedora's goal is to be the best of what works today. RHEL's goal is
to be the best of what works and is supportable for the next 7 years.
These are fundamentally incompatible goals, which cannot be served by
one distribution.
Fedora accomplishes it's goal by being a completely open and
transparent R&D lab, for both Red Hat and members of the community.
Anyone, whether you're working on Fedora in your spare time (as I do),
or if you have a mandate from your manager at Red Ha because they'd
like to see a particular feature in the next version of RHEL, can get
a feature into Fedora by following the same process. Let me make some
cases in point, using some features from Fedora 10.
First, from the community side, Hans de Goede (now a Red Hat employee,
but that's really irrelevant - he wasn't when he started work on the
feature and is employed doing something completely different), decided
that we needed better webcam support in Fedora. He defined the
problem space, worked to implement the drivers required in the
upstream kernel, and packaged a library to provide v4l2 access to v4l1
apps (sorry for the technical details there).
From the Red Hat "features we'd like to see in RHEL"
side (note that
this is speculation as to the motivation for this feature, but
pretty
educated speculation), libvirt (which is the hypervisor-agnostic
virtualization mangement layer in Fedora/RHEL) can now remotely
provision storage and perform remote installations. These features
were again implemented upstream (even though we are upstream for
libvirt), thus making the improvements available for any consumer of
libvirt, Fedora included, packaged in Fedora, put through a test plan,
and accepted.
If it really were a fact that "Fedora is a perpetual beta of RHEL"
were true, two things would not be true:
1) The first feature would not be in Fedora, it provides very little
"enterprise" value (however does provide a lot of value in that we now
have a wider range of hardware that Just Works(TM) ).
2) I would not be a member of the Fedora Engineering Steering
Committee (FESCo) which decides on the technical direction of Fedora
and is in charge of the feature process.
I'm sorry that this has been long, but I really think that this is a
really important topic, and we (Fedora Marketing) need to find a way
to spread this sort of messaging.
-Jon
11:17 p.m.
On Sat, Nov 29, 2008 at 5:15 AM, Jon Stanley <jonstanley(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, Nov 27, 2008 at 6:56 AM, Jonas Karlsson
<jonas.karlsson(a)fxdev.com> wrote:
<snippped>
I'm sorry that this has been long, but I really think that this
is a
really important topic, and we (Fedora Marketing) need to find a way
to spread this sort of messaging.
Jon:
+1 and an excellent explanation.
John Babich
Volunteer, Fedora Project
11:33 p.m.
On Fri, 2008-11-28 at 21:15 -0500, Jon Stanley wrote:
So I'm on both sides of the fence - Fedora contributor and RHEL
customer (as I suspect that many of us are). And the question does
come up a lot, so here's my "stock response":
Fedora's goal is to be the best of what works today. RHEL's goal is
to be the best of what works and is supportable for the next 7 years.
These are fundamentally incompatible goals, which cannot be served by
one distribution.
Fedora accomplishes it's goal by being a completely open and
transparent R&D lab, for both Red Hat and members of the community.
Anyone, whether you're working on Fedora in your spare time (as I do),
or if you have a mandate from your manager at Red Ha because they'd
like to see a particular feature in the next version of RHEL, can get
a feature into Fedora by following the same process. Let me make some
cases in point, using some features from Fedora 10.
First, from the community side, Hans de Goede (now a Red Hat employee,
but that's really irrelevant - he wasn't when he started work on the
feature and is employed doing something completely different), decided
that we needed better webcam support in Fedora. He defined the
problem space, worked to implement the drivers required in the
upstream kernel, and packaged a library to provide v4l2 access to v4l1
apps (sorry for the technical details there).
>From the Red Hat "features we'd like to see in RHEL" side (note that
this is speculation as to the motivation for this feature, but pretty
educated speculation), libvirt (which is the hypervisor-agnostic
virtualization mangement layer in Fedora/RHEL) can now remotely
provision storage and perform remote installations. These features
were again implemented upstream (even though we are upstream for
libvirt), thus making the improvements available for any consumer of
libvirt, Fedora included, packaged in Fedora, put through a test plan,
and accepted.
If it really were a fact that "Fedora is a perpetual beta of RHEL"
were true, two things would not be true:
1) The first feature would not be in Fedora, it provides very little
"enterprise" value (however does provide a lot of value in that we now
have a wider range of hardware that Just Works(TM) ).
2) I would not be a member of the Fedora Engineering Steering
Committee (FESCo) which decides on the technical direction of Fedora
and is in charge of the feature process.
I'm sorry that this has been long, but I really think that this is a
really important topic, and we (Fedora Marketing) need to find a way
to spread this sort of messaging.
+1
The best among the answers I have seen/read ....
I have written this on my blog :
http://satish.playdrupal.com/?q=what_is_fedora
let me know if there is a better place to write this on (may be LWN) or
please digg this : http://digg.com/linux_unix/What_is_FEDORA
Thanks
Satish
--
http://satish.playdrupal.com
9:50 a.m.
On Fri, Nov 28, 2008 at 09:15:21PM -0500, Jon Stanley wrote:
On Thu, Nov 27, 2008 at 6:56 AM, Jonas Karlsson
<jonas.karlsson(a)fxdev.com> wrote:
> Am I compleatly wrong or have anyone of you been asking the question, what
> is fedora?
So I'm on both sides of the fence - Fedora contributor and RHEL
customer (as I suspect that many of us are). And the question does
come up a lot, so here's my "stock response":
Fedora's goal is to be the best of what works today. RHEL's goal is
to be the best of what works and is supportable for the next 7 years.
These are fundamentally incompatible goals, which cannot be served by
one distribution.
Fedora accomplishes it's goal by being a completely open and
transparent R&D lab, for both Red Hat and members of the community.
Anyone, whether you're working on Fedora in your spare time (as I do),
or if you have a mandate from your manager at Red Ha because they'd
like to see a particular feature in the next version of RHEL, can get
a feature into Fedora by following the same process. Let me make some
cases in point, using some features from Fedora 10.
First, from the community side, Hans de Goede (now a Red Hat employee,
but that's really irrelevant - he wasn't when he started work on the
feature and is employed doing something completely different), decided
that we needed better webcam support in Fedora. He defined the
problem space, worked to implement the drivers required in the
upstream kernel, and packaged a library to provide v4l2 access to v4l1
apps (sorry for the technical details there).
>From the Red Hat "features we'd like to see in RHEL" side (note that
this is speculation as to the motivation for this feature, but pretty
educated speculation), libvirt (which is the hypervisor-agnostic
virtualization mangement layer in Fedora/RHEL) can now remotely
provision storage and perform remote installations. These features
were again implemented upstream (even though we are upstream for
libvirt), thus making the improvements available for any consumer of
libvirt, Fedora included, packaged in Fedora, put through a test plan,
and accepted.
If it really were a fact that "Fedora is a perpetual beta of RHEL"
were true, two things would not be true:
1) The first feature would not be in Fedora, it provides very little
"enterprise" value (however does provide a lot of value in that we now
have a wider range of hardware that Just Works(TM) ).
2) I would not be a member of the Fedora Engineering Steering
Committee (FESCo) which decides on the technical direction of Fedora
and is in charge of the feature process.
I'm sorry that this has been long, but I really think that this is a
really important topic, and we (Fedora Marketing) need to find a way
to spread this sort of messaging.
Jon, this was a great explanation and reflects exactly the way I try
to educate journalists who are reporting on Fedora. I would encourage
anyone who wants to contribute to the Marketing team to generalize
this onto a wiki page.
--
Paul W. Frields http://paul.frields.org/
gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717
http://redhat.com/ - - - - http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/
irc.freenode.net: stickster @ #fedora-docs, #fedora-devel, #fredlug
11 a.m.
2008/11/29 Paul W. Frields <stickster(a)gmail.com>
On Fri, Nov 28, 2008 at 09:15:21PM -0500, Jon Stanley wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 27, 2008 at 6:56 AM, Jonas Karlsson
> <jonas.karlsson(a)fxdev.com> wrote:
>
> > Am I compleatly wrong or have anyone of you been asking the question,
what
> > is fedora?
>
> So I'm on both sides of the fence - Fedora contributor and RHEL
> customer (as I suspect that many of us are). And the question does
> come up a lot, so here's my "stock response":
>
> Fedora's goal is to be the best of what works today. RHEL's goal is
> to be the best of what works and is supportable for the next 7 years.
> These are fundamentally incompatible goals, which cannot be served by
> one distribution.
>
> Fedora accomplishes it's goal by being a completely open and
> transparent R&D lab, for both Red Hat and members of the community.
> Anyone, whether you're working on Fedora in your spare time (as I do),
> or if you have a mandate from your manager at Red Ha because they'd
> like to see a particular feature in the next version of RHEL, can get
> a feature into Fedora by following the same process. Let me make some
> cases in point, using some features from Fedora 10.
>
> First, from the community side, Hans de Goede (now a Red Hat employee,
> but that's really irrelevant - he wasn't when he started work on the
> feature and is employed doing something completely different), decided
> that we needed better webcam support in Fedora. He defined the
> problem space, worked to implement the drivers required in the
> upstream kernel, and packaged a library to provide v4l2 access to v4l1
> apps (sorry for the technical details there).
>
> >From the Red Hat "features we'd like to see in RHEL" side (note
that
> this is speculation as to the motivation for this feature, but pretty
> educated speculation), libvirt (which is the hypervisor-agnostic
> virtualization mangement layer in Fedora/RHEL) can now remotely
> provision storage and perform remote installations. These features
> were again implemented upstream (even though we are upstream for
> libvirt), thus making the improvements available for any consumer of
> libvirt, Fedora included, packaged in Fedora, put through a test plan,
> and accepted.
>
> If it really were a fact that "Fedora is a perpetual beta of RHEL"
> were true, two things would not be true:
>
> 1) The first feature would not be in Fedora, it provides very little
> "enterprise" value (however does provide a lot of value in that we now
> have a wider range of hardware that Just Works(TM) ).
>
> 2) I would not be a member of the Fedora Engineering Steering
> Committee (FESCo) which decides on the technical direction of Fedora
> and is in charge of the feature process.
>
> I'm sorry that this has been long, but I really think that this is a
> really important topic, and we (Fedora Marketing) need to find a way
> to spread this sort of messaging.
Jon, this was a great explanation and reflects exactly the way I try
to educate journalists who are reporting on Fedora. I would encourage
anyone who wants to contribute to the Marketing team to generalize
this onto a wiki page.
In terms of finding a way to "spread this sort of messaging" - and
forgive
me if this
has already been discussed, but I didn't see anything in archives - has
anyone
ever given any thought to doing a Fedora analyst day? Similar to what a
public company
would do, minus that whole dreadfully boring "profit" part of the day :)
Maybe financial analysts would not be quite as interested (but perhaps they
would,
who knows) - but it would be a good way to interface with industry analysts
and
press people and really drive this type of message home - along with giving
some depth to the subject of "how fedora users are counted," which I saw is
also a
point of pain when it comes to reading what press people are writing,
discussing
what Fedora believes their share of the market is (does anyone do this?)...
and just generally
giving some longer, informative sessions to a lot of analysts and press
people at once
to clear up any misinformation stored in their brains. Not to mention give
them reasons
to have and keep Fedora on their radar when it comes to writing reports or
stories. And
just start developing good ongoing rapport with these people.
A lot of depth can be covered in a 1/2 day or day that just can't be covered
in a half-hour briefing
or interview. It's something that could be done the day before / after
someone else's analyst day
(RH, or anyone else who would be bringing in the desired audience of people)
- or really even
before/during/after any conference where all the appropriate parties would
likely be
(get a room for a 1/2 day during linuxcon)... or even do something streaming
online for a first
attempt.
Just a thought. :)
-Robyn
PS. Hi! I'm new here. ;)
5638
days inactive
5640
days old
marketing@lists.fedoraproject.org
8 comments
8 participants
participants (8)
-
Anton Arapov -
John Babich -
Jon Stanley -
Jonas Karlsson -
Paul W. Frields -
Robyn Bergeron -
Saadeddine AlSaidi -
Satish Eerpini