and there's fedorafaq.org. not comprehensive but pretty good and as far as I know everything there is accurate, easy to read, etc.
d
On 12/29/05, Dave Stevens geek@uniserve.com wrote:
and there's fedorafaq.org. not comprehensive but pretty good and as far as I know everything there is accurate, easy to read, etc.
d
The problem with all these fedora*.org sites is that some are and some are not officially affiliated with the main htttp://fedora.redhat.com site. The fedora marketing droids need to really get the "fedora" branding straightened out. There are too many of these "fedora*.org" sites popping up and the ones officially affiliated are not tightly coupled to the main site.
Kam Leo wrote:
On 12/29/05, Dave Stevens geek@uniserve.com wrote:
and there's fedorafaq.org. not comprehensive but pretty good and as far as I know everything there is accurate, easy to read, etc.
d
The problem with all these fedora*.org sites is that some are and some are not officially affiliated with the main htttp://fedora.redhat.com site. The fedora marketing droids need to really get the "fedora" branding straightened out. There are too many of these "fedora*.org" sites popping up and the ones officially affiliated are not tightly coupled to the main site.
The only official ones are http://fedora.redhat.com and http://fedoraproject.org as listed in http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Websites and they are pretty well coupled together. Rest of the community websites are listed in http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/CommunityWebsites and managing them is not really a function of "fedora marketing droids".
On 12/29/05, Rahul Sundaram sundaram@redhat.com wrote:
Kam Leo wrote:
On 12/29/05, Dave Stevens geek@uniserve.com wrote:
and there's fedorafaq.org. not comprehensive but pretty good and as far as I know everything there is accurate, easy to read, etc.
d
The problem with all these fedora*.org sites is that some are and some are not officially affiliated with the main htttp://fedora.redhat.com site. The fedora marketing droids need to really get the "fedora" branding straightened out. There are too many of these "fedora*.org" sites popping up and the ones officially affiliated are not tightly coupled to the main site.
The only official ones are http://fedora.redhat.com and http://fedoraproject.org as listed in http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Websites and they are pretty well coupled together. Rest of the community websites are listed in http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/CommunityWebsites and managing them is not really a function of "fedora marketing droids".
Isn't "Fedora" trademarked? So shouldn't the marketing droids set the legal beagles upon the unofficial sites?
-- Rahul
Hi
Isn't "Fedora" trademarked? So shouldn't the marketing droids set the legal beagles upon the unofficial sites?
You really want the Fedora legal team (not marketing droids) to send notices to the community websites and ask them to take down those?. Here is the trademark guidelines http://fedora.redhat.com/about/trademarks/ for your reference. There are better ways to handle that. If you want to participate in the effort see http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Websites. That would go a long way towards resolving any issues.
On 12/29/05, Rahul Sundaram sundaram@redhat.com wrote:
Hi
Isn't "Fedora" trademarked? So shouldn't the marketing droids set the legal beagles upon the unofficial sites?
You really want the Fedora legal team (not marketing droids) to send notices to the community websites and ask them to take down those?. Here is the trademark guidelines http://fedora.redhat.com/about/trademarks/ for your reference. There are better ways to handle that. If you want to participate in the effort see http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Websites. That would go a long way towards resolving any issues.
-- Rahul
I am not advocating the taking down of these sites. I have no financial interest and nothing to gain by doing so. Red Hat does. Changing the domain names of unofficial sites will become or is an issue since the marketing types have embarked upon a fedora*.org naming scheme.
Hi
I am not advocating the taking down of these sites. I have no financial interest and nothing to gain by doing so. Red Hat does. Changing the domain names of unofficial sites will become or is an issue since the marketing types have embarked upon a fedora*.org naming scheme.
What are you advocating to resolve that?.
From: "Rahul Sundaram" sundaram@redhat.com
Kam Leo wrote:
On 12/29/05, Dave Stevens geek@uniserve.com wrote:
and there's fedorafaq.org. not comprehensive but pretty good and as far as I know everything there is accurate, easy to read, etc.
d
The problem with all these fedora*.org sites is that some are and some are not officially affiliated with the main htttp://fedora.redhat.com site. The fedora marketing droids need to really get the "fedora" branding straightened out. There are too many of these "fedora*.org" sites popping up and the ones officially affiliated are not tightly coupled to the main site.
The only official ones are http://fedora.redhat.com and http://fedoraproject.org as listed in http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Websites and they are pretty well coupled together. Rest of the community websites are listed in http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/CommunityWebsites and managing them is not really a function of "fedora marketing droids".
Gee, and here I thought he was volunteering to be a Fedora Marketing Droid, one each, prepackaged and delivered. Last I knew Fedora was not "marketed" at all by RedHat. It's their beta test group.
{o.o}
Kam Leo wrote:
On 12/29/05, Rahul Sundaram sundaram@redhat.com wrote:
Kam Leo wrote:
On 12/29/05, Dave Stevens geek@uniserve.com wrote:
and there's fedorafaq.org. not comprehensive but pretty good and as far as I know everything there is accurate, easy to read, etc.
d
The problem with all these fedora*.org sites is that some are and some are not officially affiliated with the main htttp://fedora.redhat.com site. The fedora marketing droids need to really get the "fedora" branding straightened out. There are too many of these "fedora*.org" sites popping up and the ones officially affiliated are not tightly coupled to the main site.
The only official ones are http://fedora.redhat.com and http://fedoraproject.org as listed in http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Websites and they are pretty well coupled together. Rest of the community websites are listed in
for some reason I thought fedoralegacy.org was official.
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/CommunityWebsites and managing them is not really a function of "fedora marketing droids".
Isn't "Fedora" trademarked? So shouldn't the marketing droids set the legal beagles upon the unofficial sites?
If I trademark the letter eff, it doesn't give me rights over words, such as Fedora, which contain it.
Battles have been fought and lost by rich companies complaining about names (or the site contents) they think degrading to their image, names like windowssucks.org and microsoftsucks.org (these do exist, I checked whois, but I've no idea whether anyone's ever complained about these names or sites).
Even Red Hat's claim to the name Fedora hasn't prevented the Fedora Society (which likely predates Red Hat's use of the word).
Hi
Gee, and here I thought he was volunteering to be a Fedora Marketing Droid, one each, prepackaged and delivered. Last I knew Fedora was not "marketed" at all by RedHat. It's their beta test group.
Fedora has its own development and test releases. It doesnt have a beta release. RHEL has its own beta testing group thats independent from Fedora.
Rahul Sundaram wrote:
Hi
Gee, and here I thought he was volunteering to be a Fedora Marketing Droid, one each, prepackaged and delivered. Last I knew Fedora was not "marketed" at all by RedHat. It's their beta test group.
Fedora has its own development and test releases. It doesnt have a beta release. RHEL has its own beta testing group thats independent from Fedora.
I generally characterise Fedora as a rolling beta. Recognising that, I still use it, but it's a serious concern that people argue it's more than that and think it a fine platform to which they might entrust their business.
But then, I remember there are people who entrust their business to Windows.
On 12/29/05, Rahul Sundaram sundaram@redhat.com wrote:
Hi
I am not advocating the taking down of these sites. I have no financial interest and nothing to gain by doing so. Red Hat does. Changing the domain names of unofficial sites will become or is an issue since the marketing types have embarked upon a fedora*.org naming scheme.
What are you advocating to resolve that?.
Here are two of many possible options:
1. The Fedora Core legel beagle should respectfully ask each of the unofficial sites to desist from using fedora*.org naming scheme.
2. Do not use the fedora*.org naming scheme and creating a new domain for every function/topic that comes along. Use one domain name as the parent. If FedoraProject.org is the parent then all child sites should be subdomains. You might have something like forums.fedoraproject.org or faq.fedoraproject.org.
If you folks go with creating a new domain for each new function you're going to have to use option 1.
Rahul
jdow wrote:
From: "Rahul Sundaram" sundaram@redhat.com
Kam Leo wrote:
On 12/29/05, Dave Stevens geek@uniserve.com wrote:
and there's fedorafaq.org. not comprehensive but pretty good and as far as I know everything there is accurate, easy to read, etc.
d
[snip]
The only official ones are http://fedora.redhat.com and http://fedoraproject.org as listed in http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Websites and they are pretty well coupled together. Rest of the community websites are listed in http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/CommunityWebsites and managing them is not really a function of "fedora marketing droids".
Gee, and here I thought he was volunteering to be a Fedora Marketing Droid, one each, prepackaged and delivered. Last I knew Fedora was not "marketed" at all by RedHat. It's their beta test group.
{o.o}
IMO, exactly on the mark. But when I have made similar comments, it always sparks a counter response.
Mike
John Summerfied wrote:
Kam Leo wrote:
On 12/29/05, Rahul Sundaram sundaram@redhat.com wrote:
Kam Leo wrote:
On 12/29/05, Dave Stevens geek@uniserve.com wrote:
and there's fedorafaq.org. not comprehensive but pretty good and as far as I know everything there is accurate, easy to read, etc.
d
The problem with all these fedora*.org sites is that some are and some are not officially affiliated with the main htttp://fedora.redhat.com site. The fedora marketing droids need to really get the "fedora" branding straightened out. There are too many of these "fedora*.org" sites popping up and the ones officially affiliated are not tightly coupled to the main site.
The only official ones are http://fedora.redhat.com and http://fedoraproject.org as listed in http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Websites and they are pretty well coupled together. Rest of the community websites are listed in
for some reason I thought fedoralegacy.org was official.
Official in what sense? It is not sponsored by Red Hat Co.
[snip]
Mike
On 12/29/05, Kam Leo kam.leo@gmail.com wrote:
On 12/29/05, Rahul Sundaram sundaram@redhat.com wrote:
Hi
I am not advocating the taking down of these sites. I have no financial interest and nothing to gain by doing so. Red Hat does. Changing the domain names of unofficial sites will become or is an issue since the marketing types have embarked upon a fedora*.org naming scheme.
What are you advocating to resolve that?.
Here are two of many possible options:
- The Fedora Core legel beagle should respectfully ask each of the
unofficial sites to desist from using fedora*.org naming scheme.
What is the reasoning for doing this at all? What are the cons of these websites' existence?
-- As a boy I jumped through Windows, as a man I play with Penguins.
Hi
Here are two of many possible options:
- The Fedora Core legel beagle should respectfully ask each of the
unofficial sites to desist from using fedora*.org naming scheme.
Ok. Thats easy enough but what if people refuse and certainly some of them would. Remember just having a trademark doesnt mean you can legally restrict all use of the words nor is it derisable or a financial gain for any project.
- Do not use the fedora*.org naming scheme and creating a new domain
for every function/topic that comes along. Use one domain name as the parent. If FedoraProject.org is the parent then all child sites should be subdomains. You might have something like forums.fedoraproject.org or faq.fedoraproject.org.
http://fedoraforum.org for example here is a community website endorsed by project. So setting up redirects such as these is pretty easy. We already do it on several instances. legacy.fedoraproject.org or people.fedoraproject.org for example. If you find sub domains such as these useful file enhancements reports against the infrastructure in http://bugzilla.redhat.com or post to the fedora-websites-list.
-
Rahul
Learn. Network. Experience open source. Red Hat Summit Nashville | May 30 - June 2, 2006 Learn more: http://www.redhat.com/promo/summit/
Hi
I generally characterise Fedora as a rolling beta.
That would somewhat fit in better with the description of rawhide. Fedora is meant to be robust. Since it has a large number of users and its fast moving the chances of regressions are somewhat larger. Would help if more people tackle updates-testing repository and provide feedback.
On Thu, 2005-12-29 at 19:03 -0800, Kam Leo wrote:
On 12/29/05, Rahul Sundaram sundaram@redhat.com wrote:
Hi
I am not advocating the taking down of these sites. I have no financial interest and nothing to gain by doing so. Red Hat does. Changing the domain names of unofficial sites will become or is an issue since the marketing types have embarked upon a fedora*.org naming scheme.
What are you advocating to resolve that?.
Here are two of many possible options:
- The Fedora Core legel beagle should respectfully ask each of the
unofficial sites to desist from using fedora*.org naming scheme.
Sounds like a slashdot escalated PR nightmare to me.
Rahul Sundaram wrote:
Hi
I generally characterise Fedora as a rolling beta.
That would somewhat fit in better with the description of rawhide. Fedora is meant to be robust. Since it has a large number of users and its fast moving the chances of regressions are somewhat larger. Would help if more people tackle updates-testing repository and provide feedback.
Oh, come one! From the website: "...combination of stable and cutting-edge software..."
Cutting-edge software is rarely robust. That's why it's called "cutting edge."
I was around when rawhide was created; its nature may have changed since then, but about the time of Valhalla it was a mismash of packages, whatever the Red Hatters were working on, and if Jeremy had recently released a new Anaconda it might even be installable, but there were many complaints that it wasn't.
It was also used for unofficial fixes; this resulted in people thinking packages there were official.
I found it a useful source of newer versions of some packages, perhaps when I required some new feature (likely I got dhcp3 there when 2 was current).
Today, I suggest that If you want stability and support, buy RHEL in the appropriate flavour If you want stability and cheap, download one of the EL clones such as TAO, CENTOS, WBEL (are there more?) If you want the latest and can bear the occasional breakage, use Fedora Core 4. If you don't care for stability and/or want to help refine things, Fedora Core 5 beta (maybe blend in some rawhide?) is for you.
Hi
Last I knew Fedora was not "marketed" at all by RedHat.
It is indeed "marketed". http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Marketing
From: "Rahul Sundaram" sundaram@redhat.com
Hi
Last I knew Fedora was not "marketed" at all by RedHat.
It is indeed "marketed". http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Marketing
With a RedHat budget? A cursory read suggests it's all volunteer based.
{o.o}
Hi
Oh, come one! From the website: "...combination of stable and cutting-edge software..."
Cutting-edge software is rarely robust. That's why it's called "cutting edge."
That would be "bleeding edge". Its entirely possible to having cutting edge and robust software. Automating testing, better participation in rawhide, test releases and updates-testing and bug triaging to get feedback and fixes faster are some of the possible ways to improve it.
I was around when rawhide was created; its nature may have changed since then, but about the time of Valhalla it was a mismash of packages, whatever the Red Hatters were working on, and if Jeremy had recently released a new Anaconda it might even be installable, but there were many complaints that it wasn't.
Rawhide is a changing beast. Things evolve.
It was also used for unofficial fixes; this resulted in people thinking packages there were official.
There shouldnt be "unofficial fixes" in it now.
If you don't care for stability and/or want to help refine things, Fedora Core 5 beta (maybe blend in some rawhide?) is for you.
There is no beta releases for Fedora. Only test releases.
Hi
It is indeed "marketed". http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Marketing
With a RedHat budget? A cursory read suggests it's all volunteer based.
Yep, with a Red Hat budget. There were a few FUDCons organized by Red Hat for instance. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FUDCon
From: "Rahul Sundaram" sundaram@redhat.com
There is no beta releases for Fedora. Only test releases.
A rose by any other name would smell as sweet - or bad. {^_-}
jdow wrote:
From: "Rahul Sundaram" sundaram@redhat.com
There is no beta releases for Fedora. Only test releases.
A rose by any other name would smell as sweet - or bad. {^_-}
You miss the point obviously. Beta releases have a very different meaning from test releases. Test releases are snapshots of the current development tree at that point with a limited development freeze and there are three test releases before the final release with significant number of updates in between them. Beta releases on the other hand are close to the final releases and is the second stage after a internal/private alpha release.
From: "Rahul Sundaram" sundaram@redhat.com
jdow wrote:
From: "Rahul Sundaram" sundaram@redhat.com
There is no beta releases for Fedora. Only test releases.
A rose by any other name would smell as sweet - or bad. {^_-}
You miss the point obviously. Beta releases have a very different meaning from test releases. Test releases are snapshots of the current development tree at that point with a limited development freeze and there are three test releases before the final release with significant number of updates in between them. Beta releases on the other hand are close to the final releases and is the second stage after a internal/private alpha release.
Oy! So they are post-alpha releases or pre-alpha? Methinks me sees now that they are pretty darned early in the cycle from rawhide to a formal FedoraCore release.
{^_^}
Hi
Oy! So they are post-alpha releases or pre-alpha? Methinks me sees now that they are pretty darned early in the cycle from rawhide to a formal FedoraCore release.
There isnt any alpha releases for Fedora aside from perhaps some internal testing done by Red Hat between releases since everything is out there anyway which is why the original "beta" releases were renamed into test releases to signify this change.
jdow wrote:
From: "Rahul Sundaram" sundaram@redhat.com
There is no beta releases for Fedora. Only test releases.
A rose by any other name would smell as sweet - or bad. {^_-}
I warned you about the response you would stir up!
Mike
Rahul Sundaram wrote:
Hi
Oh, come one! From the website: "...combination of stable and cutting-edge software..."
Cutting-edge software is rarely robust. That's why it's called "cutting edge."
That would be "bleeding edge". Its entirely possible to having cutting edge and robust software. Automating testing, better participation in rawhide, test releases and updates-testing and bug triaging to get feedback and fixes faster are some of the possible ways to improve it.
Main Entry: bleeding edge Part of Speech: noun Definition: extremely advanced technology with no current practical application, beyond the cutting edge of technology
There is no beta releases for Fedora. Only test releases.
beta means test. As does alpha (but more testing).
I'm quoting my research, for those interested in the historical aspects.
beta
/bay't*/, /be't*/ or (Commonwealth) /bee't*/ n. 1. Mostly working, but still under test; usu. used with `in': `in beta'. In the Real World, systems (hardware or software) software often go through two stages of release testing: Alpha (in-house) and Beta (out-house?). Beta releases are generally made to a group of lucky (or unlucky) trusted customers. 2. Anything that is new and experimental. "His girlfriend is in beta" means that he is still testing for compatibility and reserving judgment. 3. Flaky; dubious; suspect (since beta software is notoriously buggy).
Historical note: More formally, to beta-test is to test a pre-release (potentially unreliable) version of a piece of software by making it available to selected (or self-selected) customers and users. This term derives from early 1960s terminology for product cycle checkpoints, first used at IBM but later standard throughout the industry. `Alpha Test' was the unit, module, or component test phase; `Beta Test' was initial system test. These themselves came from earlier A- and B-tests for hardware. The A-test was a feasibility and manufacturability evaluation done before any commitment to design and development. The B-test was a demonstration that the engineering model functioned as specified. The C-test (corresponding to today's beta) was the B-test performed on early samples of the production design, and the D test was the C test repeated after the model had been in production a while.
Source: Jargon File 4.2.0
I'll stay with my description on both counts.
Rahul Sundaram wrote:
jdow wrote:
From: "Rahul Sundaram" sundaram@redhat.com
There is no beta releases for Fedora. Only test releases.
A rose by any other name would smell as sweet - or bad. {^_-}
You miss the point obviously. Beta releases have a very different
I think you do miss the point, actually. Since FC release is time-driven rather than QA-driven, it is a test package.
meaning from test releases. Test releases are snapshots of the current development tree at that point with a limited development freeze and there are three test releases before the final release with significant number of updates in between them. Beta releases on the other hand are close to the final releases and is the second stage after a internal/private alpha release.
You are conflating internal vs. external nomenclature. By any reasonable definition of "alpha" and "beta" release, they are both releases in which recipients are expected to participate in testing, whereas a "quality" (if I may coin a term) release is one in which the recipients are *not* expected to participate in testing, but rather be purely users.
Fedora Core is a PROJECT, which Red Hat expressly states is intended to involve the USERS in the testing. That means, IMO, it is beta test.
Mike
Hi
Main Entry: bleeding edge Part of Speech: noun Definition: extremely advanced technology with no current practical application, beyond the cutting edge of technology
Rawhide is called bleeding edge on occasions but it definitely has practical applications
There is no beta releases for Fedora. Only test releases.
beta means test. As does alpha (but more testing).
Not within the Fedora Project. See the project history for more details.
jdow wrote:
From: "Rahul Sundaram" sundaram@redhat.com
jdow wrote:
From: "Rahul Sundaram" sundaram@redhat.com
There is no beta releases for Fedora. Only test releases.
A rose by any other name would smell as sweet - or bad. {^_-}
You miss the point obviously. Beta releases have a very different meaning from test releases. Test releases are snapshots of the current development tree at that point with a limited development freeze and there are three test releases before the final release with significant number of updates in between them. Beta releases on the other hand are close to the final releases and is the second stage after a internal/private alpha release.
Oy! So they are post-alpha releases or pre-alpha? Methinks me sees now that they are pretty darned early in the cycle from rawhide to a formal FedoraCore release.
From the perspective of FC being upstream of RHEL, they are pre-alpha, IMO.
{^_^}
Mike
Hi
I think you do miss the point, actually. Since FC release is time-driven rather than QA-driven, it is a test package.
Its time driven but not rigid. Releases have been postponed for better QA in Fedora. Both the first and second releases of Fedora Core 5 have been delayed for this reason for a recent example. Projects driven by time are not test packages. That would mean openbsd or gnome would be test packages. There is always a balance between the number of features and bug fixes made between releases and the need to do frequent releases in the open source world. Release early, Release often.
Fedora Core is a PROJECT, which Red Hat expressly states is intended to involve the USERS in the testing. That means, IMO, it is beta test.
Its called a project to invite more community participation and also indicate that Red Hat does not sell Fedora as a retail product. Though much of the answers are outdated now the first one still applies here.
http://fedora.redhat.com/about/faq/
Hi
From the perspective of FC being upstream of RHEL, they are pre-alpha, IMO.
RHEL updates on occasions many packages not in FC. Some of the RHEL packages are also in FE rather than FC. Moreover RHEL has its own Alpha and Beta release cycles branching off rawhide, FC and backports of upstream projects not connected to FC release cycle.
Rahul Sundaram wrote:
Hi
I think you do miss the point, actually. Since FC release is time-driven rather than QA-driven, it is a test package.
Its time driven but not rigid. Releases have been postponed for better
You very clearly did not respond to the point of my message. I said that you are conflating internal and external nomenclature, which point you either totally missed, or deliberately chose not to address.
I probably will not be participating any further in this discussion, as I've already been around this particular mulberry bush more often than is probably warranted.
You continue to use what would be, in any reasonable discussion of QA, a contrived definition of terms.
Mike
Hi
You very clearly did not respond to the point of my message. I said that you are conflating internal and external nomenclature, which point you either totally missed, or deliberately chose not to address.
My point was that the releases have been renamed into test releases for a particular reason and I was explaining the history behind the change. Also explaining why a time based release cycle for a project does not determine that its a test release by any means.
You continue to use what would be, in any reasonable discussion of
QA, a contrived definition of terms.
Your 2 cents I suppose ;-)
Hi
You are conflating internal vs. external nomenclature. By any reasonable definition of "alpha" and "beta" release, they are both releases in which recipients are expected to participate in testing, whereas a "quality" (if I may coin a term) release is one in which the recipients are *not* expected to participate in testing, but rather be purely users.
Right. No disagreement on that.
On Thu, 2005-12-29 at 21:38, John Summerfied wrote:
Today, I suggest that If you want stability and support, buy RHEL in the appropriate flavour If you want stability and cheap, download one of the EL clones such as TAO, CENTOS, WBEL (are there more?) If you want the latest and can bear the occasional breakage, use Fedora Core 4. If you don't care for stability and/or want to help refine things, Fedora Core 5 beta (maybe blend in some rawhide?) is for you.
But realistically, what people want is close-to-the latest plus some stuff that none of the above includes, like mplayer, xine, xmms with mp3 support, java, flash and the browser plugins for them, etc., so you want FC3 or FC4 with all current updates and a bunch of 3rd party packages. It can be done, but it's not necessarily pretty.
Les Mikesell wrote:
On Thu, 2005-12-29 at 21:38, John Summerfied wrote:
Today, I suggest that If you want stability and support, buy RHEL in the appropriate flavour If you want stability and cheap, download one of the EL clones such as TAO, CENTOS, WBEL (are there more?)
Scientific Linux is another.
[snip]
Mike
Rahul Sundaram wrote:
Hi
Main Entry: bleeding edge Part of Speech: noun Definition: extremely advanced technology with no current practical application, beyond the cutting edge of technology
Rawhide is called bleeding edge on occasions but it definitely has practical applications
There is no beta releases for Fedora. Only test releases.
beta means test. As does alpha (but more testing).
Not within the Fedora Project. See the project history for more details.
Let's not redefine the language. I got standard, agreed definitions. Let's keep to those so others will understand us.
HI
Let's not redefine the language. I got standard, agreed definitions. Let's keep to those so others will understand us.
The good thing about standards is that we have so many to choose from. When referring to Fedora releases it would be better to use the terminology used within the project to avoid confusion.
Les Mikesell wrote:
On Thu, 2005-12-29 at 21:38, John Summerfied wrote:
Today, I suggest that If you want stability and support, buy RHEL in the appropriate flavour If you want stability and cheap, download one of the EL clones such as TAO, CENTOS, WBEL (are there more?) If you want the latest and can bear the occasional breakage, use Fedora Core 4. If you don't care for stability and/or want to help refine things, Fedora Core 5 beta (maybe blend in some rawhide?) is for you.
But realistically, what people want is close-to-the latest plus
Realistically, what people want varies widely. Geeks aside, one thing they agree on is that it works, works and works.
some stuff that none of the above includes, like mplayer, xine, xmms with mp3 support, java, flash and the browser plugins for them, etc., so you want FC3 or FC4 with all current updates and a bunch of 3rd party packages. It can be done, but it's not necessarily pretty.
Those people are on the wrong distro:-)
SUSE has java, flash and at least some of the other stuff. Including madwifi drivers (needed for my laptop).
If we can't have all that stuff, then we really ought to have simple installers for it.
Rahul Sundaram wrote:
HI
Let's not redefine the language. I got standard, agreed definitions. Let's keep to those so others will understand us.
The good thing about standards is that we have so many to choose from. When referring to Fedora releases it would be better to use the terminology used within the project to avoid confusion.
s=avoid=cause even more=
John Summerfied wrote:
Rahul Sundaram wrote:
HI
Let's not redefine the language. I got standard, agreed definitions. Let's keep to those so others will understand us.
The good thing about standards is that we have so many to choose from. When referring to Fedora releases it would be better to use the terminology used within the project to avoid confusion.
s=avoid=cause even more=
Fedora has three test releases between every final release. Its pretty simple really.
From: "Mike McCarty" mike.mccarty@sbcglobal.net
Rahul Sundaram wrote:
Hi
I think you do miss the point, actually. Since FC release is time-driven rather than QA-driven, it is a test package.
Its time driven but not rigid. Releases have been postponed for better
You very clearly did not respond to the point of my message. I said that you are conflating internal and external nomenclature, which point you either totally missed, or deliberately chose not to address.
I probably will not be participating any further in this discussion, as I've already been around this particular mulberry bush more often than is probably warranted.
You continue to use what would be, in any reasonable discussion of QA, a contrived definition of terms.
Mike
Fedora, being an open project with some seed funding from RH, probably considers all users as being "inside" since the project has no real outside, just some people who are less inside than others.
{^_-}
From: "John Summerfied" debian@herakles.homelinux.org
Rahul Sundaram wrote:
Hi
Main Entry: bleeding edge Part of Speech: noun Definition: extremely advanced technology with no current practical application, beyond the cutting edge of technology
Rawhide is called bleeding edge on occasions but it definitely has practical applications
There is no beta releases for Fedora. Only test releases.
beta means test. As does alpha (but more testing).
Not within the Fedora Project. See the project history for more details.
Let's not redefine the language. I got standard, agreed definitions. Let's keep to those so others will understand us.
<grump>If Microsoft can redefine the world and claim they invented it why can't Fedora?</grump>
{^_-}
--- Les Mikesell lesmikesell@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, 2005-12-29 at 21:38, John Summerfied wrote:
Today, I suggest that If you want stability and support, buy RHEL in the
appropriate flavour
If you want stability and cheap, download one of
the EL clones such as
TAO, CENTOS, WBEL (are there more?) If you want the latest and can bear the occasional
breakage, use Fedora
Core 4. If you don't care for stability and/or want to
help refine things,
Fedora Core 5 beta (maybe blend in some rawhide?)
is for you.
But realistically, what people want is close-to-the latest plus some stuff that none of the above includes, like mplayer, xine, xmms with mp3 support, java, flash and the browser plugins for them, etc., so you want FC3 or FC4 with all current updates and a bunch of 3rd party packages. It can be done, but it's not necessarily pretty.
-- Les Mikesell lesmikesell@gmail.com
-- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
Very well said. Users want a product that just works straight out without having to "search, yum their way, compile their way", etc with all the great stuff " mplayer, xine, xmms with mp3 support, java, flash and the browser plugins for them, etc. "
and since Red Hat is "releasing"/"has released" Fedora on its own, why not have all these things within Fedora. No more trademarks/patents other difficulties to get what users want. What is holding Fedora Back now?
Best Regards & Happy New Year
Antonio
P.S. Sorry for creating an "extension field", an extension/continuation of this thread which many people might/or are already offended by its length. Try # rm -rf Re: Why questions don't get answered, or "No, I've already RTFM, tell me the answer!" if it does not work file a bugzilla against rm command. By the way is this the longest thread of the year, or will it be Peter Whalley, petsupermarket.uol.br Enquiring minds want to know.
__________________________________________ Yahoo! DSL Something to write home about. Just $16.99/mo. or less. dsl.yahoo.com
On Fri, 2005-12-30 at 19:04 -0800, Antonio Olivares wrote:
--- Les Mikesell lesmikesell@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, 2005-12-29 at 21:38, John Summerfied wrote:
Today, I suggest that If you want stability and support, buy RHEL in the
appropriate flavour
If you want stability and cheap, download one of
the EL clones such as
TAO, CENTOS, WBEL (are there more?) If you want the latest and can bear the occasional
breakage, use Fedora
Core 4. If you don't care for stability and/or want to
help refine things,
Fedora Core 5 beta (maybe blend in some rawhide?)
is for you.
But realistically, what people want is close-to-the latest plus some stuff that none of the above includes, like mplayer, xine, xmms with mp3 support, java, flash and the browser plugins for them, etc., so you want FC3 or FC4 with all current updates and a bunch of 3rd party packages. It can be done, but it's not necessarily pretty.
Very well said. Users want a product that just works straight out without having to "search, yum their way, compile their way", etc with all the great stuff " mplayer, xine, xmms with mp3 support, java, flash and the browser plugins for them, etc. "
and since Red Hat is "releasing"/"has released" Fedora on its own, why not have all these things within Fedora. No more trademarks/patents other difficulties to get what users want. What is holding Fedora Back now?
---- licensing restrictions - which of course has nothing to do with Red Hat's involvement or non-involvement with Fedora. ----
By the way is this the longest thread of the year, or will it be Peter Whalley, petsupermarket.uol.br Enquiring minds want to know.
---- who cares?
Craig
Hi
and since Red Hat is "releasing"/"has released" Fedora on its own, why not have all these things within Fedora. No more trademarks/patents other difficulties to get what users want. What is holding Fedora Back now?
Fedora foundation is governed by the same laws as Red Hat itself. So any potential patent restrictions still apply . The design of the project isnt changing. Fedora is going to remain completely open source and free of patent encumbered software. The goals and status of the foundation is available at http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Foundation
--- Craig White craigwhite@azapple.com wrote:
On Fri, 2005-12-30 at 19:04 -0800, Antonio Olivares wrote:
--- Les Mikesell lesmikesell@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, 2005-12-29 at 21:38, John Summerfied
wrote:
Today, I suggest that If you want stability and support, buy RHEL in
the
appropriate flavour
If you want stability and cheap, download one
of
the EL clones such as
TAO, CENTOS, WBEL (are there more?) If you want the latest and can bear the
occasional
breakage, use Fedora
Core 4. If you don't care for stability and/or want to
help refine things,
Fedora Core 5 beta (maybe blend in some
rawhide?)
is for you.
But realistically, what people want is
close-to-the
latest plus some stuff that none of the above includes, like mplayer, xine, xmms with mp3 support, java, flash and the
browser
plugins for them, etc., so you want FC3 or FC4 with all
current
updates and a bunch of 3rd party packages. It can be
done,
but it's not necessarily pretty.
Very well said. Users want a product that just
works
straight out without having to "search, yum their
way,
compile their way", etc with all the great stuff " mplayer, xine, xmms with mp3 support, java, flash and the
browser
plugins for them, etc. "
and since Red Hat is "releasing"/"has released"
Fedora
on its own, why not have all these things within Fedora. No more trademarks/patents other
difficulties
to get what users want. What is holding Fedora
Back
now?
licensing restrictions - which of course has nothing to do with Red Hat's involvement or non-involvement with Fedora.
Ok! We can still get all the goodies, no problem a little bit of work. I can live with that, but other people want the cake and eat it too. Thank you for the explanation. I thought that the Fedora Foundation upon release from Red Hat's grip, would allow for inclusion of the programs that could not be added because of licensing issues.
By the way is this the longest thread of the year,
or
will it be Peter Whalley, petsupermarket.uol.br Enquiring minds want to know.
who cares?
Just a curiosity! No damage or hard feelings intended. :)
Craig
-- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
Best Regards,
Antonio
__________________________________________ Yahoo! DSL Something to write home about. Just $16.99/mo. or less. dsl.yahoo.com
--- Rahul Sundaram sundaram@redhat.com wrote:
Hi
and since Red Hat is "releasing"/"has released"
Fedora
on its own, why not have all these things within Fedora. No more trademarks/patents other
difficulties
to get what users want. What is holding Fedora
Back
now?
Fedora foundation is governed by the same laws as Red Hat itself. So any potential patent restrictions still apply . The design of the project isnt changing. Fedora is going to remain completely open source and free of patent encumbered software. The goals and status of the foundation is available at http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Foundation
-- Rahul
Learn. Network. Experience open source. Red Hat Summit Nashville | May 30 - June 2, 2006 Learn more: http://www.redhat.com/promo/summit/
-- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
Thanks for pointing that out. It cleared things for me and hopefully for others.
Best Regards,
Antonio
__________________________________ Yahoo! for Good - Make a difference this year. http://brand.yahoo.com/cybergivingweek2005/
On Fri, 2005-12-30 at 19:23 -0800, Antonio Olivares wrote:
and since Red Hat is "releasing"/"has released"
Fedora
on its own, why not have all these things within Fedora. No more trademarks/patents other
difficulties
to get what users want. What is holding Fedora
Back
now?
licensing restrictions - which of course has nothing to do with Red Hat's involvement or non-involvement with Fedora.
Ok! We can still get all the goodies, no problem a little bit of work. I can live with that, but other people want the cake and eat it too. Thank you for the explanation. I thought that the Fedora Foundation upon release from Red Hat's grip, would allow for inclusion of the programs that could not be added because of licensing issues.
---- If you think about it, the sanctity of open source licenses is far more important than the ease of getting all the goodies installed.
Things like flash player, though free are not open source and are available in binary format only which creates an issue if distributed in conjunction with software that is GPL license.
Then there are patent issues as Rahul suggested with things like audio and video codecs/formats which could present a sticky wicket for a distribution.
If nothing else, it sort of differentiates that which is open source and freely re-distributable and that which is restricted usage, license, patent encumbered, etc. and the reason that you can more easily get these things installed on a proprietary operating system is because you are paying the royalties in the fees ***NVC*** ;-)
for information on NVC - or just a bit of tongue in cheek humor...what happens when a Linux user tries to explore a proprietary operating system for the first time...
http://lxer.com/module/newswire/view/47221/index.html
good for amusement on a holiday
Craig
On 12/30/05, Antonio Olivares olivares14031@yahoo.com wrote:
Ok! We can still get all the goodies, no problem a little bit of work. I can live with that, but other people want the cake and eat it too. Thank you for the explanation. I thought that the Fedora Foundation upon release from Red Hat's grip, would allow for inclusion of the programs that could not be added because of licensing issues.
Users who want everything so neatly and conviently packaged should pony up cash to pay for the non-free things they wish to enjoy. And in all fairness, by the graces of the guys at Livna and ATrpms, all these free things can easily be added to a fresh install.
Do I sense some Red Hat dislike in your tone?
By the way is this the longest thread of the year, or
will it be Peter Whalley, petsupermarket.uol.br Enquiring minds want to know.
who cares?
Just a curiosity! No damage or hard feelings intended. :)
I think it is fair to say this is not the longest thread. Earlier this year there was a thread about top posting and other bad list practices, that thread was very long if I remember correctly.
Craig
-- As a boy I jumped through Windows, as a man I play with Penguins.
--- Arthur Pemberton pemboa@gmail.com wrote:
On 12/30/05, Antonio Olivares olivares14031@yahoo.com wrote:
Ok! We can still get all the goodies, no problem
a
little bit of work. I can live with that, but
other
people want the cake and eat it too. Thank you
for
the explanation. I thought that the Fedora
Foundation
upon release from Red Hat's grip, would allow for inclusion of the programs that could not be added because of licensing issues.
Users who want everything so neatly and conviently packaged should pony up cash to pay for the non-free things they wish to enjoy. And in all fairness, by the graces of the guys at Livna and ATrpms, all these free things can easily be added to a fresh install.
Do I sense some Red Hat dislike in your tone?
Not at all. Red Hat sponsors Fedora which I like and all those things I can get on my own. I personally do not mind going through other packages and getting what I want and configure the system to my liking. It was an honest question which many people ask and they do not get a clear answer.
By the way is this the longest thread of the
year,
or
will it be Peter Whalley,
petsupermarket.uol.br
Enquiring minds want to know.
who cares?
Just a curiosity! No damage or hard feelings intended. :)
I think it is fair to say this is not the longest thread. Earlier this year there was a thread about top posting and other bad list practices, that thread was very long if I remember correctly.
Yes, but this one is not too far behind.
Craig
-- As a boy I jumped through Windows, as a man I play with Penguins.
--
fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe:
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
Best Regards,
Antonio
__________________________________ Yahoo! for Good - Make a difference this year. http://brand.yahoo.com/cybergivingweek2005/
Craig White wrote:
Things like flash player, though free are not open source and are available in binary format only which creates an issue if distributed in conjunction with software that is GPL license.
Please, research this point and show is what the problem is.
I believe there is not problem distributing GPL and non-free software as part of the same collation.
The problem Red Hat has is that it cannot support flash, java and such. Red Hat got burned with CDE some years ago; I imagine this is a factor in its current attitude. Other vendors do distribute varying amounts of closed-source software.
Then there are patent issues as Rahul suggested with things like audio and video codecs/formats which could present a sticky wicket for a distribution.
I wonder how many Americans know what a sticky wicket is?
On Sun, 2006-01-01 at 00:08 +0800, John Summerfied wrote:
Craig White wrote:
Things like flash player, though free are not open source and are available in binary format only which creates an issue if distributed in conjunction with software that is GPL license.
Please, research this point and show is what the problem is.
I believe there is not problem distributing GPL and non-free software as part of the same collation.
---- http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/gpl-faq.html#OrigBSD ----
The problem Red Hat has is that it cannot support flash, java and such. Red Hat got burned with CDE some years ago; I imagine this is a factor in its current attitude. Other vendors do distribute varying amounts of closed-source software.
---- http://www.macromedia.com/licensing/distribution/faq/#item-1-9 ----
Then there are patent issues as Rahul suggested with things like audio and video codecs/formats which could present a sticky wicket for a distribution.
I wonder how many Americans know what a sticky wicket is?
---- heck - we don't even understand cricket.
;-)
http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-sti2.htm
Craig
On 12/31/05, Antonio Olivares olivares14031@yahoo.com wrote:
--- Arthur Pemberton pemboa@gmail.com wrote:
On 12/30/05, Antonio Olivares olivares14031@yahoo.com wrote:
Ok! We can still get all the goodies, no problem
a
little bit of work. I can live with that, but
other
people want the cake and eat it too. Thank you
for
the explanation. I thought that the Fedora
Foundation
upon release from Red Hat's grip, would allow for inclusion of the programs that could not be added because of licensing issues.
Users who want everything so neatly and conviently packaged should pony up cash to pay for the non-free things they wish to enjoy. And in all fairness, by the graces of the guys at Livna and ATrpms, all these free things can easily be added to a fresh install.
Do I sense some Red Hat dislike in your tone?
Not at all. Red Hat sponsors Fedora which I like and all those things I can get on my own. I personally do not mind going through other packages and getting what I want and configure the system to my liking. It was an honest question which many people ask and they do not get a clear answer.
Fair enough. I was just curious. May the fedoraproject.org site needs to make this very clear somehow.
[snip]
I think it is fair to say this is not the longest
thread. Earlier this year there was a thread about top posting and other bad list practices, that thread was very long if I remember correctly.
Yes, but this one is not too far behind.
I suspect you maybe right, pity we have know way of knowing for sure.
-- As a boy I jumped through Windows, as a man I play with Penguins.
From: "John Summerfied" debian@herakles.homelinux.org
I wonder how many Americans know what a sticky wicket is?
It's obviously a feature of a Cricket field that's been dunked in too much honey.
{O,o}
On Sat, 2005-12-31 at 21:14 -0800, jdow wrote:
From: "John Summerfied" debian@herakles.homelinux.org
I wonder how many Americans know what a sticky wicket is?
It's obviously a feature of a Cricket field that's been dunked in too much honey.
---- I think it's more like the infield at Wrigley field in Chicago when they let the grass grow long and water it all night so that ground balls hit during the next days' game are slowed down so that the infielders can field them.
Craig
Craig White wrote:
On Sun, 2006-01-01 at 00:08 +0800, John Summerfied wrote:
Craig White wrote:
Things like flash player, though free are not open source and are available in binary format only which creates an issue if distributed in conjunction with software that is GPL license.
Please, research this point and show is what the problem is.
I believe there is not problem distributing GPL and non-free software as part of the same collation.
http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/gpl-faq.html#OrigBSD
I thought you were saying that there was a problem if software (such as gcc) which is covered by the GPL was part of the same collation.
Let me say, IANAL.
The FAQ does not refer to that issue.
Mozilla is not licenced under of the terms of the GPL, and so its terms are not relevant.
Even if it were licenced under the GPL, the premable to the GPL says, "We protect your rights with two steps: (1) copyright the software, and (2) offer you this license which gives you legal permission to copy, distribute and/or modify the software."
That is, the licence deals with distribution of the software, not how users use it. The FAQ deals with how it's used, and IMV is outside the scope of the licence.
The problem Red Hat has is that it cannot support flash, java and such. Red Hat got burned with CDE some years ago; I imagine this is a factor in its current attitude. Other vendors do distribute varying amounts of closed-source software.
http://www.macromedia.com/licensing/distribution/faq/#item-1-9
There is, I think, some room to debate what "repackaging" might mean. I'd think an unaltered tarball, zip file or rpm would not constitute repackaging, but the software owners might differ.
Then there are patent issues as Rahul suggested with things like audio and video codecs/formats which could present a sticky wicket for a distribution.
I wonder how many Americans know what a sticky wicket is?
heck - we don't even understand cricket.
The World Cup's coming to a place near you soon. Part was to be played in USA, but there were travel issues, so you'll need to schedule a Carribean holiday to take it in.
Such pain:-)
Hi
Fair enough. I was just curious. May the fedoraproject.org http://fedoraproject.org site needs to make this very clear somehow.
It already does. It quite clearly says in the frontpage that Fedora will remain free and open source.
regards Rahul
John Summerfied wrote:
Craig White wrote:
Things like flash player, though free are not open source and are available in binary format only which creates an issue if distributed in conjunction with software that is GPL license.
Please, research this point and show is what the problem is.
AIUI, it has to do with the license on the (independently loaded, but linked at load time) libraries. GPL is (intentionally) like a cancer, eating into anything it touches.
I wonder how many Americans know what a sticky wicket is?
Comes from cricket, IIRC. Something about after rain the bowler can't properly aim the ball off the wicket due to the yielding/ sticky surface it presents.
Never have played cricket.
Mike
Rahul Sundaram wrote:
Hi
Fair enough. I was just curious. May the fedoraproject.org http://fedoraproject.org site needs to make this very clear somehow.
It already does. It quite clearly says in the frontpage that Fedora will remain free and open source.
Ahhhhh, but where does it say that Fedora will *remain*?
I read this as "Fedora will remain free and open source [so long as it continues to exist]."
Mike
Hi
Ahhhhh, but where does it say that Fedora will *remain*?
I read this as "Fedora will remain free and open source [so long as it continues to exist]."
And what makes you think it will suddenly disappear?. Red Hat isnt setting up a foundation for nothing. If you have a single reason to believe otherwise make them explicit.
regards Rahul
Rahul Sundaram wrote:
Hi
Ahhhhh, but where does it say that Fedora will *remain*?
I read this as "Fedora will remain free and open source [so long as it continues to exist]."
And what makes you think it will suddenly disappear?. Red Hat isnt
Where did I say that I thought it would suddenly disappear? You quoted everything I wrote.
setting up a foundation for nothing. If you have a single reason to believe otherwise make them explicit.
Where is the Egyptian empire? Where is the Medo-Persian empire? Where is the Roman empire?
Name one single thing which you think is never going to come to an end.
It is a *certainty* that Fedora will come to an end. Just when that will happen, I don't know.
And you didn't answer my question. Where does Fedora make clear exactly how it intends to remain? Inquiring minds wish to know.
Mike
2006/1/2, Mike McCarty mike.mccarty@sbcglobal.net:
Where is the Egyptian empire? Where is the Medo-Persian empire? Where is the Roman empire?
Name one single thing which you think is never going to come to an end.
Ohhh, and when M$ come to an end? Before or after FC / RH and the whole GNU-Linux? :-)
-- Alessandro Brezzi
On Tue, 2006-01-03 at 10:01 +0100, Alessandro Brezzi wrote:
Ohhh, and when M$ come to an end? Before or after FC / RH and the whole GNU-Linux? :-)
Well, it won't be before Microsoft gets it right...
Alessandro Brezzi wrote:
2006/1/2, Mike McCarty mike.mccarty@sbcglobal.net:
Where is the Egyptian empire? Where is the Medo-Persian empire? Where is the Roman empire?
Name one single thing which you think is never going to come to an end.
Ohhh, and when M$ come to an end? Before or after FC / RH and the whole GNU-Linux? :-)
LOL!
Yuh havtuh luvvit!
Mike
Hi
Name one single thing which you think is never going to come to an end.
Your ranting?
It is a *certainty* that Fedora will come to an end. Just when that will happen, I don't know.
And you didn't answer my question. Where does Fedora make clear exactly how it intends to remain? Inquiring minds wish to know.
http://fedora.redhat.com/About/
regards Rahul
-
Alessandro Brezzi -
Antonio Olivares -
Arthur Pemberton -
Craig White -
Dave Stevens -
jdow -
John Summerfield -
Kam Leo -
Les Mikesell -
Michael A. Peters -
Mike McCarty -
Rahul Sundaram -
Tim