[fab] Proposed Project: Fedora Testing

[Karsten Wade]

On Wed, 2006-07-05 at 17:16 -0400, Will Woods wrote:
> On Sat, 2006-07-01 at 10:53 -0400, Greg DeKoenigsberg wrote:
> > On Sat, 1 Jul 2006, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> > 
> > > I would let the test suite run on a full development cycle, get the 
> > > community involved and show the results before accepting it as a Fedora 
> > > Project. 

Whose development cycle?  FCs?  $UNNAMED_PROJECT's?

> Sure, it's up to the board to decide whether to accept this as a Fedora
> Project. We'll be running tests, releasing code, and hopefully writing
> new stuff all through the rest of the FC6 development cycle either way.

Since this new project approval process is, well, new, I want to do a
sanity check on what I think I see here.  Is this statement accurate?

"You want proof of the viability of the project _before_ it becomes a
formal Fedora Project project, i.e., gets to use the name Fedora
Something Project."

These points come to mind from this:

1. If this barrier were in place previously some projects (Fedora
Ambassadors) wouldn't have gotten very far.  "We are the Ambassadors
Project.  Ambassadors for what?  Uh, stuff."

Sometimes what differentiates a project is just the Fedora moniker, as
well as the mission.  How can a project distinguish itself as
Fedora-name-carrying-worthy without having the association in the first
place?

Let's call this, the Chicken and the Egg Problem.

2. How then does a project name itself in a meaningful and memorable
way, if it *hopes* but is not *guaranteed* acceptance as a project?

For example, "Testing Project" doesn't stick that well without the
"Fedora" at the beginning.  So, Will decides to call it "Velodrome", a
catchy name that captures the speedy and testing (proving ground) nature
of the project.  Then it gets accepted as a Fedora project after the
Velodrome name has stuck.  Do we call it "Fedora Velodrome"?
"Velodrome, the Fedora Testing Project"?  "Velodrome, a division of
Fedora Project?"

In some cases, the Velodrome brand might be worth more.  But perhaps the
project gains more from the Fedora renaming?

We go through this in the corporate/consumer world with product
acquisition and renaming.  Do we want to introduce this to Fedora?

3. The above holds true for existing projects with existing names,
although it is more poignant for projects trying to catch their first
few breaths.

4. What does it mean to be a formal Fedora Project project, beyond the
name?  That is, is someone restricted from using the Wiki for the
project until then?  How about CVS?  Plone?

This raises the problem that is outside of this discussion but related,
that of how FP provides project infrastructure.  What is the barrier to
get a project space?  What does it mean to go from a (small p)roject to
a (large P)roject?

5. How many contributors does FP bring to the party?  Conversely, how
many are held back (unaware, resistant, etc.) by withholding project
recognition?  How much risk is a nascent project put to by trying to
breath on its own as an unrecognized child?

The concern here is that we can miss out on valuable projects coming to
life because we withhold vital support when it could help the most.
Knowing when to apply the spatula and when the knife is sometimes a
subtle thing, what happens when he hand over that decision to a process?

As much as I love a good, well-documented process, I want to keep care
not to smother the rise of good idea.

- Karsten, balancing on the delicate knife's edge of metaphoria
-- 
Karsten Wade, RHCE, 108 Editor    ^     Fedora Documentation Project 
 Sr. Developer Relations Mgr.     |  fedoraproject.org/wiki/DocsProject
   quaid.108.redhat.com           |          gpg key: AD0E0C41
////////////////////////////////// \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/advisory-board/attachments/20060705/2cf62179/attachment.bin