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

[Jaroslav Reznik]

----- Original Message -----
> >   SIG-centric
> >   ---
> >   * SIGs will form "bubbles" within this ring, possibly varying from
> > packaging guidelines in order to meet needs.
> >   * Change management will also be SIG-focused.
> > 
> > Fedora already largely works this way. We just need more of it. If we
> > can be more flexible about what it means to participate in Fedora, we
> > can increase the intersection with upstream communities.
> 
> Do we need a more formal definition of a SIG? Right now it's... anyone
> who calls themselves that.
> 
> How do we handle resources for these Rings?

Resources were the first thing that came to my mind when I read this -
I'm definitely fan of well defined "core" Fedora, even in the meaning
of meta distribution which coudl be used for other project. It would be 
worth to implement it and we should be able to implement this within 
Fedora. But with my current job hat on - I can't imagine implementing 
the whole proposal to create a similar experience we do today - products.
Most of SIGs are one man show, even release engineering is mostly one man
show, same for all other teams, Fedora QA is pretty big team compared
to other Fedora teams but still - releasing even one kind of Fedora,
with same release day, same lifecycle is a barely manageable without
investments (aka more automation - not only for QA etc.). Same for 
development... I understand proposal as - this is the way how we can
get more contributors, even from upstreams but it's the question if
they would be interested in.

Btw. I'm not saying it's impossible - but it could be pretty hard.
Also we still don't have an answer for "what should be Fedora" and
even now we have 100000 different and pretty conflicting visions ;-).

Jaroslav