Draft Product Description for Fedora Workstation

[Michael Cronenworth]

Peter Robinson wrote:
> I don't see many people forcing things through, I believe that the vast majority
> of contributors either like the change or aren't bothered by it. There's
> certainly no proof that it'll make anything worse. That doesn't mean its going
> to be perfect or without teething problems as the changes are made and things
> settle down.

There's plenty of reasons why you haven't seen any negative feedback. I'll share 
my views on this subject since I'm in the "not sure" ballpark of this new process.

Where's the benefit of creating a handful of workgroups that now have some sort 
of power over the distribution? After reading all of the emails in the past week 
I have yet to see any benefits of this "Fedora.next" process. I agree Fedora 
needs to continue to evolve, but this process appears to shake the foundations 
of Fedora. Specifics: Different kernels per "product", app sandboxing (lib 
bundling). Will the DVD/Live ISOs currently created cease to exist F21+? 
Fragmentation of Fedora into Cloud/Workstation/Server "products"? I'm just 
randomly spitting out ideas in my head that come to mind, but you cannot expect 
that silence equates to agreement in your favor.

It strikes me as odd at the large number of @redhat accounts and small number of 
non- at redhat accounts in favor of this new process. Who is in charge of evolving 
Fedora at this point? I do value Red Hat involvement, but I don't want the 
common myth of "Fedora = Red Hat beta" to become a fact.

I'm still going to keep my ears open and attempt at digesting what this new idea 
is bringing to the table, but it hasn't sit well on my stomach so far.