Schedule for Wednesday's FESCo Meeting (2013-09-11)
"Jóhann B. Guðmundsson"
johannbg at gmail.com
Wed Sep 11 17:22:54 UTC 2013
On 09/11/2013 04:18 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
> At this point, what I'd_really_ like is your help in making this work going
> forward. From what you've said, I don't think we're really all that far out
> of alignment, and maybe we can bring that together.
There is alot of alignment in how I see us going forward as are in your
proposal however there is a fundamental difference in what you are
proposing and what I'm proposing we should do.
What I see us going forward with is the core/baseOS "FedoraOS" that the
community delivers at large while the sub community they themselves set
the direction, their target audience and deliver "their" product on top
of the stable foundation we provide them with, the "FedoraOS".
You want to limit the project to three "official default products" that
the community delivers at large, which to me, does not solve existing
problem in our community, narrows down the "scope" of the project as
well as hinders innovation and participation while I want to liberate
the community from the shackles of the "default" thus finally put the
default skeletons to their grave, reduce the "bureaucracy" and allow for
more innovation. more products, and faster adoption for us as an
community in whole to the constantly changing open source environment
and have us contribute shaping that landscape.
Due to the fundamental difference in our proposal I'm not seeing where
we could meet half way through, on a common grounds in them ( i'm all
ears if you have a starting point ).
And since we are setting the direction for the project for the next 5 -
10 years we as a community need to give this some serious thought if
something like what you proposed is the way forward ( tying us down to 3
products ) or if we should move into the direction of what I propose in
More information about the devel