Please review / comment on / help with AWS Marketplace listing

[Matthew Miller]

On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 10:29:05AM -0700, Robyn Bergeron wrote:
> My other note is that - esp. in the "company description" since it's
> the page about "fedora" the distro - we should probably be more
> consistent in our references to Fedora vs. the Fedora Project -

FWIW, I lifted that part from http://fedoraproject.org/en/about-fedora, with
very minor wording tweaks. I like your "Our mission is..." wording better.

  The Fedora Project is a worldwide, open partnership of free software
  contributors and enthusiasts. Our mission is to lead the advancement
  of free and open source software and content as a collaborative
  community.

> The Fedora Project is primarily sponsored by Red Hat, the world's most
> trusted provider of open source technology. (I'm not quite sold on your
> last line re: why red hat invests, but can go either way, I'm not too
> picky)

Again lifted from about-fedora. I'm not sure how exactly relevant it is
anyway.


> One thing to consider: Is it worth highlighting more specifically that
> Fedora is the upstream for RHEL?

"Fedora is the foundation for Red Hat Enterprise Linux, a powerful
enterprise OS.", says http://fedoraproject.org/en/features/. 

If we say this at all, I'd like to stress that it's not just a preview, but
a place for collaboration and innovation which feeds into RHEL. Although we
kick the term around a lot, "upstream" might not mean much to non-distro
people.

  Fedora is the foundation for Red Hat Enterprise Linux, and Red Hat
  sponsors the Fedora Project to encourage collaboration and incubate
  innovative new free software technologies.

?


> >   Fedora 17 (Beefy Miracle) 2012.05.15
> >   [Note: I put the date there because I'd like to leave open the option
> >    of updated image spins. Open to suggestions on how best to do this.]
> That's fine, though I think it would be good to make clear that it's
> not something like a "nightly image" kind of thing. We don't have to
> drill into details on "how we'd do that" right now, I agree it's
> useful to keep the option open.

  Fedora 17 (Beefy Miracle) 2012.05

with no day. If we happen to do more than one update a month (I hope not) we
can add it for that time only.

> >Description:
> Fedora is a Linux-based operating system that provides a wide audience of
> users <http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User_base> with access to the
> latestfree and open source software
> <http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html>, in a stable
> <http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA>, secure
> <http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Security/Features> and easy to manage form.
> The Fedora cloud image in EC2 (blah blah blah, what you have above)

Not sure we can have hyperlinks here. Without it, that'd be:

  Fedora is a Linux-based operating system which provides a wide audience of
  users with access to the latest free and open source software in a stable,
  secure, and easy to manage form. The Fedora Cloud image in EC2 provides a
  functional core on top of which any of tens of thousands of free and open
  source software packages can be easily added.

How's that sound? (I'll check about the links.)


> >Support Offered:
> >   FALSE
> >   [This is a boolean. We _do_ offer community support, of course. Should
> >   maybe be true?]
> Ehhhhhhhhhhhhh. That seems misleading, I think to have it as true.

Done.


> >   Source Code
> >   http://download.fedoraproject.org/pub/fedora/linux/releases/17/Fedora/source/SRPMS/
> I guess this is more of a technical question: How does the above
> link accurately represent things if we - as you described above -
> have different "more updated but still F17" images? Do we think
> people will be confused / looking for F17 -
> date/morepreciseversion/etc?

Good question. If we do that, we should probably provide a cloud sig wiki
page describing the updated image, and _that_ could link to the appropriate
source tree.


> >   Fedora is available free of charge. Normal Amazon Web Services terms
> >   apply.
> We might include something saying "Normal Amazon Web Services terms
> and charges" or "terms, including costs for storage and
> bandwidth/uploading/downloading/whatever" apply.

  Fedora is available free of charge. Normal Amazon Web Services terms and
  charges apply.

> Also: Since we have a mirror internal to amazon - is that something
> worth highlighting? Or does the AWS marketplace work differently
> from regular EC2 (I haven't looked in detail at any differences)

Works the same once it's installed, so this is a good idea. Maybe tack it on
to the end of the description above -- "...software packages can be easily
added from an Amazon-internal mirror with no extra bandwidth costs." Or
something.


> >Available in Regions....
> >   True for all.
> This is not really true in EC2, I don't think we're doing Fedora in
> non-us regions, are we? - does AWS marketplace provide wider
> availability?

Yes, we currently are.

In any case, this particular set of fields is instructive rather than
descriptive -- they will copy it to whichever regions we say yes to.
(This is somewhat different from the current approach, where we upload a
different AMI to each region. Another thing for me to check: do they end up
with the same AMI ID in each region if we do it this way?)


> >Recommended Instance Type:
> >   Standard Large
> Is this basically a bulletpoint option, or is there additional text
> that we could include as to why (ie: standard large - Recommended
> for common use cases like $unicornbuilding, $bikeshedding, etc)

One choice. And it's what you'll get with one click deployment. I pulled
*this* particular choice out of my bikeshed. Standard Medium would be my
second choice.

-- 
Matthew Miller  ☁☁☁  Fedora Cloud Architect  ☁☁☁  <mattdm at fedoraproject.org>