The vision for the Fedora Workstation

["Jóhann B. Guðmundsson"]

On 02/11/2014 10:10 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
> I would really like any ideas on how we could measure better. It's a hard
> problem. The things we can easily count (like IP connections) don't really
> tell us much anyway. What kind of things do you think we should measure, and
> how should we do it?

Ok so here is were my thought process differs from those driving the WG 
and the .next effort, fesco, board etc.

 From my perspective people are looking at this entirely wrong since as 
I see it our first and foremost target audience for the project is the 
individual that *contributes back* and as such we should not be looking 
into "number of downloads" or "IP connections" we should be monitoring 
how many people join/leave our project and *contribute back*.

That is our true success/failure health rate, as it is for basically 
every project and since the more people we have contributing back 
releng/qa/docs/design/marketing/packaging etc.
The better we are at sustaining ourselves as an distribution and the 
better we are at sustaining ourselves, the better we are at delivering 
feedback back upstream.
The better we are at delivering feedback upstream the greater the reward 
when the result from that feedback travels back downstream to us.

This is one of the fundamental reason why I'm against elevating one 
product over another since we as an project loose contributors, the 
individuals that matter the most to us when we are doing that and the 
only place we are doing that and have been doing that is with the 
default desktop and now single output from the workstation WG as opposed 
to a process/standards those desktop environments have to meet to become 
an "official" workstation product just like a component that wants a 
place in a specific server role.

Bottom line our target audience are reachers not leechers

JBG