RFC: Proposal for a more agile "Fedora.next" (draft of my Flock talk)

[drago01]

On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 3:38 PM, Matthew Miller
<mattdm at fedoraproject.org> wrote:
> This is a draft of the proposal I'm presenting at Flock, "An Architecture
> for a More Agile Fedora" (<http://sched.co/19ugKGM>). It represents a big
> change to how we as the Fedora project put together our distribution. I've
> gone through several drafts of this and talked to a few people, and I'd
> really value all of your feedback to refine it further.
>
> Preliminary slides are available at <http://mattdm.org/fedora/next/>; I will
> update them as this discussion progresses. (So, page numbers might change.)
> What follows is an annotated text version of the presentation — the
> annotations basically being what I might say as each slide displays.
>
> If you have a short attention span, you might want flip through the slides
> first and come back for explanation where it's unclear. And the explanation
> here might be unclear too — please ask questions.
>
>
> An Architecture for a More Agile Fedora
> presented by Matthew Miller ( ← with input from many people)
> ===
>
>   Problem Statement (What's this all about?)
>   ---
>
>   Let's Start with What's Good
>   ---
>   * Fedora is awesome
>   * Great tech, great people
>   * Amazing, high standards
>   * Best enthusiast distro
>   * Solid base for RHEL
>   * Pretty decent cloud image
>
> I've been involved to some small degree with Fedora since the beginning.
> This is a project and a Linux distribution which I love, and which I know
> everyone reading this also cares about deeply. We don't want to break what
> is successful and works.
>
>
>   But...
>   ---
>   * We need to be more than that
>   * Not widely used by RHEL users
>   * Not so great for building on...
>   * Including Red Hat's own stuff
>   * We're not seen as relevant...
>   * Let alone exciting
>
> Whenever I go to a tech meetup or talk to someone from a new startup
> company, their developers are inevitably using a different (usually
> proprietary) desktop OS, plus a non-Fedora distribution on their code. We're
> being left behind and left out. It doesn't matter how theoretically great we
> are if we end up with no users.

I don't see how your proposal solves any of those issues. You are
actually splitting Fedora into multiple
distributions which makes it even worse (more fragmentation, not
really something you can target etc etc).