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

[Chris Murphy]

On Jul 23, 2013, at 2:11 PM, Nicolas Mailhot <nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net> wrote:
> 
> Without putting *any* blame on infra, I think that explains why no startup
> is using Fedora (which is the reason advanced to justify this proposal). A
> startup needs to build its own infra from scratch as fast as possible.

Replying to this even thought it also applies to earlier comments on infra not using Fedora being depressing, and also the "eat one's own dog food" comment. A while ago Apple opened a big data center, and some Apple users were pretty depressed to see a lot of job openings for sysadmins were for RHEL, some for Solaris, and not so many for OS X. Use the right tool for the job, no more or less. I don't think it's inherently a problem if Fedora infrastructure isn't running Fedora. The question is if the community really wants to revisit ready to setup, use, and easy to maintain systems compared to current Fedora, and Windows and OS X.


> If the Fedora project intends to promote instead a Fedora+something_else
> mix, where is this mix documented (for startup creators to find) and what
> exactly is the Fedora project doing to ensure this mix works well?

Fair and interesting question.

> If the something_else is composed of third-party services that primarily
> target other desktops, who is going to believe replacing them with Fedora
> is a good idea?

Once it's the best tool for the job, it's the sales department's job to address this.


Chris Murphy