[fedora-websites] Issue #946: Expected editions status for F30
by Matthew Miller
mattdm reported a new issue against the project: `fedora-websites` that you are following:
``
Putting this here in one ticket for reference:
* Fedora Workstation as normal
* Fedora Server: same, but will *also* include Fedora Cloud (but not Atomic/CoreOS)
* Fedora Atomic: no longer an edition. As I understand it, current version will be supported a little longer yet but we don't want to encourage new installs
* Fedora CoreOS: not _quite_ ready to be an edition, but we want to launch as an edition shortly after. (June?)
* Fedora IoT: also not quite ready to be an edition. Will be at https://iot.fedoraproject.org/. Also plan to launch as an edition in around June.
``
To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/fedora-websites/issue/946
9 months, 1 week
[fedora-websites] Issue #928: Workstation download page advertises incorrect
media size
by Michael Catanzaro
catanzaro reported a new issue against the project: `fedora-websites` that you are following:
``
Our download page:
https://getfedora.org/en/workstation/download/
says the F29 live image is 1.8 GB, but this is not true. It's actually 1,931,476,992 bytes, which rounds down to 1.9 GB. That happens to be 1.799 GiB, so 1.8 GiB would be reasonable, but the download page says GB, not GiB. My guess is it's improperly doing its computation in GiB, and nobody noticed before now because the live image was previously not large enough for the difference between GB and GiB to actually matter.
We should consider rounding up, anyway, and reporting 2.0 GB, because a 1.9 GB USB drive would not be large enough to hold the 1.93 GB image. This will become a practical problem very soon because soon we'll be reporting that the download image is 2.0 GB large, and users will be trying to flash it to 2.0 GB USB drives, and they will be disappointed when it doesn't work.
Moved from https://pagure.io/fedora-workstation/issue/86
``
To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/fedora-websites/issue/928
2 years, 2 months
Re: Suggestions for Website
by Máirín Duffy
No I'm less concerned about that although I'd put it on the about page and not as a new footer link.
~m
On March 22, 2019 1:08:53 PM EDT, Brian Proffitt <bproffit(a)redhat.com> wrote:
>Does this include the addition of a governance link in the site footer?
>
>BKP
>
>On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 9:36 AM Máirín Duffy <duffy(a)fedoraproject.org>
>wrote:
>
>> Hi Brian,
>>
>> So the alt downloads in the sidebar I thought you were talking about
>is
>> different than spins.fpo and alt.fpo. The ones I thought you were
>talking
>> about were, for example, the links to netinstall isos and local media
>> vendors.
>>
>> Spins.fpo and alt.fpo are very intentionally on different websites.
>The
>> getfedora.orgpage is targeted at mainstream first time Fedora users,
>users
>> we wouldnt want using a specific spin as part of their first
>experience bc
>> they are less polished and not as supported as the editions that are
>> featured prominently on getfedora.
>>
>> So I guess my point is that these are not surface level website
>tweaks.
>> The suggested tweaks belie a drastic change in strategy I am not
>> comfortable with, esp without a lot more data and context.
>>
>> ~m
>>
>> On March 21, 2019 6:12:47 PM EDT, Brian Proffitt
><bproffit(a)redhat.com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> This is certainly not critical, but I beleieve the thread of the
>>> conversation I had with Bex that making the spins and alt
>architectures
>>> easier to find might reduce the friction point a bit for people
>seeking to
>>> try out Fedora.
>>>
>>> However, I think your suggested solution is a very good idea. It
>would
>>> meet the goal we have to demonstrate different platform availability
>and
>>> seems less clunky than what I proposed. Could that be a possibility?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Brian
>>>
>>> On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 5:56 PM Máirín Duffy
><duffy(a)fedoraproject.org>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Brian,
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for the analysis and info!
>>>>
>>>> For the alt download links - do we want or need to emphasize their
>>>> availability? Is there more context for who needs these, how common
>a need
>>>> that would be, etc? Bc a better solution could be - for example -
>upgrading
>>>> a particular link from an alt link to a main download link if new
>>>> circumstances require it.
>>>>
>>>> ~m
>>>>
>>>> On March 21, 2019 4:03:19 PM EDT, Brian Proffitt <bkp(a)redhat.com>
>wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> Periodically, the Red Hat Open Source and Standards team looks at
>open source projects with which we are affiliated to see if there are
>community elements that can be improved. Fedora's review late last year
>went very well, and after some discussions with Brian Exelbierd, there
>were a couple of suggestions we wanted to make to your team to
>highlight key areas of Fedora. Specifically:
>>>>>
>>>>> * Highlight the Alternate Downloads links. Currently on your
>Downloads pages, the Get more Fedora links are located on the
>lower-right corner of the page. Moving this section up the sidebar
>would emphasize the availability of these alternative versions of
>Fedora.
>>>>> * Highlight the Project's governance content. The governance model
>for Fedora does exist[1], but it is not easy to find. Could a link be
>added to the About section in the site's footer?
>>>>>
>>>>> Those were the only two things we had to suggest. If you have any
>questions, please don't hesitate to reach out.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Brian
>>>>>
>>>>> [1] https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/council/
>>>>> ------------------------------
>>>>>
>>>>> websites mailing list -- websites(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>>>>> To unsubscribe send an email to
>websites-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>>>>> Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
>>>>> List Guidelines:
>https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
>>>>> List Archives:
>https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/websites@lists.fedoraprojec...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my
>brevity.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> BRIAN PROFFITT
>>>
>>> senior PRINCIPAL COMMUNITY Architect
>>>
>>> Red Hat Inc. <https://www.redhat.com/>
>>>
>>> bproffit(a)redhat.com T: 574.383.9BKP
>>> <http://redhatemailsignature-marketing.itos.redhat.com/> M:
>>> 574.780.5695
><http://redhatemailsignature-marketing.itos.redhat.com/>
>>> <https://red.ht/sig>
>>> T: @redhatopen <https://twitter.com/redhatopen> F: Red Hat
>Community
>>> <https://www.facebook.com/redhatopen>
>>>
>>
>> --
>> Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
>>
>
>
>--
>
>BRIAN PROFFITT
>
>senior PRINCIPAL COMMUNITY Architect
>
>Red Hat Inc. <https://www.redhat.com/>
>
>bproffit(a)redhat.com T: 574.383.9BKP
><http://redhatemailsignature-marketing.itos.redhat.com/> M:
>574.780.5695
><http://redhatemailsignature-marketing.itos.redhat.com/>
><https://red.ht/sig>
>T: @redhatopen <https://twitter.com/redhatopen> F: Red Hat Community
><https://www.facebook.com/redhatopen>
--
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
2 years, 6 months
Re: Suggestions for Website
by Máirín Duffy
Hi Brian,
So the alt downloads in the sidebar I thought you were talking about is different than spins.fpo and alt.fpo. The ones I thought you were talking about were, for example, the links to netinstall isos and local media vendors.
Spins.fpo and alt.fpo are very intentionally on different websites. The getfedora.orgpage is targeted at mainstream first time Fedora users, users we wouldnt want using a specific spin as part of their first experience bc they are less polished and not as supported as the editions that are featured prominently on getfedora.
So I guess my point is that these are not surface level website tweaks. The suggested tweaks belie a drastic change in strategy I am not comfortable with, esp without a lot more data and context.
~m
On March 21, 2019 6:12:47 PM EDT, Brian Proffitt <bproffit(a)redhat.com> wrote:
>This is certainly not critical, but I beleieve the thread of the
>conversation I had with Bex that making the spins and alt architectures
>easier to find might reduce the friction point a bit for people seeking
>to
>try out Fedora.
>
>However, I think your suggested solution is a very good idea. It would
>meet
>the goal we have to demonstrate different platform availability and
>seems
>less clunky than what I proposed. Could that be a possibility?
>
>Thanks,
>Brian
>
>On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 5:56 PM Máirín Duffy <duffy(a)fedoraproject.org>
>wrote:
>
>> Hi Brian,
>>
>> Thanks for the analysis and info!
>>
>> For the alt download links - do we want or need to emphasize their
>> availability? Is there more context for who needs these, how common a
>need
>> that would be, etc? Bc a better solution could be - for example -
>upgrading
>> a particular link from an alt link to a main download link if new
>> circumstances require it.
>>
>> ~m
>>
>> On March 21, 2019 4:03:19 PM EDT, Brian Proffitt <bkp(a)redhat.com>
>wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Periodically, the Red Hat Open Source and Standards team looks at
>open source projects with which we are affiliated to see if there are
>community elements that can be improved. Fedora's review late last year
>went very well, and after some discussions with Brian Exelbierd, there
>were a couple of suggestions we wanted to make to your team to
>highlight key areas of Fedora. Specifically:
>>>
>>> * Highlight the Alternate Downloads links. Currently on your
>Downloads pages, the Get more Fedora links are located on the
>lower-right corner of the page. Moving this section up the sidebar
>would emphasize the availability of these alternative versions of
>Fedora.
>>> * Highlight the Project's governance content. The governance model
>for Fedora does exist[1], but it is not easy to find. Could a link be
>added to the About section in the site's footer?
>>>
>>> Those were the only two things we had to suggest. If you have any
>questions, please don't hesitate to reach out.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Brian
>>>
>>> [1] https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/council/
>>> ------------------------------
>>>
>>> websites mailing list -- websites(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>>> To unsubscribe send an email to
>websites-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>>> Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
>>> List Guidelines:
>https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
>>> List Archives:
>https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/websites@lists.fedoraprojec...
>>>
>>>
>> --
>> Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
>>
>
>
>--
>
>BRIAN PROFFITT
>
>senior PRINCIPAL COMMUNITY Architect
>
>Red Hat Inc. <https://www.redhat.com/>
>
>bproffit(a)redhat.com T: 574.383.9BKP
><http://redhatemailsignature-marketing.itos.redhat.com/> M:
>574.780.5695
><http://redhatemailsignature-marketing.itos.redhat.com/>
><https://red.ht/sig>
>T: @redhatopen <https://twitter.com/redhatopen> F: Red Hat Community
><https://www.facebook.com/redhatopen>
--
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
2 years, 6 months
Mindshare commitee nominations
by Nick Bebout
Hi,
Maria Leonova has asked to be replaced on the Mindshare committee. I would
like to call for nominations for who would like to serve on this committee
to represent the design/web teams. The seat is representing both teams, so
after nominations, if there is not consensus, we may need to have some sort
of election.
Please reply if you are interested.
nb, for the Mindshare committee
2 years, 6 months
