Unofficial Fedora Remix being advertised on the project front page

Wed Oct 16 16:34:13 UTC 2013

On 10/16/2013 04:17 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 04:10:07PM +0000, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
>> On 10/16/2013 03:48 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote:
>>> On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 03:35:57PM +0000, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
>>>
>>>> I noticed that unofficial Fedora remix called Pidora was being
>>>> advertised on the projects homepage.
>>> What do you mean by "unofficial"? There's no set of official remixes.
>> Some people refered to [1] as being remixes since they deviate from
>> the default one.
> Spins are made up entirely of packages that are part of the official
> Fedora repository. Remixes aren't. Spins aren't remixes, official or
> otherwise. The difference is described on the wiki:
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Remix#Are_Remixes_and_Spins_different.3F

I never said I was the one that thought they where spins as well as 
spins are the ones we should be advertising on the front page.
>>>> And should we not put effort in presenting our own community
>>>> official remixes before we start presenting unofficial ones and
>>>> aren't advertising unofficial remixes on our own mailinglists as
>>>> well frown upon?
>>> I haven't seen the advertising that you're referring to - have you got a
>>> pointer?
>>   slot 4 on the projects homepage
> I was referring to the mailing lists.

It's on devel post from Hans since you are subscribed there I suggest 
you look through your archives.
>   
>>> Pidora fills a niche that nobody else in the Fedora community
>>> appears to have expressed an interest in (ie, building something that'll
>>> run on ARMv6), so there's a benefit to it existing and us indicating
>>> that it's available to people. Given that it's effectively targetting a
>>> single device, I don't see any real benefit to including it as part of
>>> the general Fedora project, especially since it'd almost inevitably be
>>> restricted to being a secondary architecture.
>>>
>>> But really, what's the problem here? People have chosen to build
>>> something interesting on top of Fedora and we've chosen to let people
>>> know it exists.
>> I use and love the pidora as much as the next guy the issue here is
>> the act of opening the pandora box of starting to advertise
>> unofficial remixes on our frontpage.
> Please stop using the word "unofficial" here. I see absolutely no
> problem with advertising projects that further the goals of Fedora.

Why it's the word from the pidora community themselves [1]

" "Unofficial Fedora remixes are available for additional targets 
including the Raspberry Pi"

The "unofficial Fedora remix" for the Raspberry Pi is currently Pidora. 
This is not supported by the Fedora Project. "

>> At least if we are going to start advertising 3rd party stuff we
>> should collect money on it to invest into the community in area
>> which Red Hat cant or is not willing to fund.
> I can't imagine Pidora being in any position to pay enough to let us do
> anything interesting.
>

Nor was I saying it could. Why are you making this about the product 
being advertised as in the content of the advertisement as opposed to 
the act of allowing 3rd party project being advertised in the first 
place and secondly in front of advertising the spins sub community's?

1. http://www.raspberrypi.org/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?t=47112&p=392864
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/advisory-board/attachments/20131016/e7f2b5a4/attachment.html>