Fedora.NEXT Products and the fate of Spins

Stephen Gallagher sgallagh at redhat.com
Wed Jan 29 21:03:08 UTC 2014


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 01/29/2014 03:57 PM, H. Guémar wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I think we should keep spins as long as we don't have a formal
> process to accept new products. Something like => proposal => crop
> (aka product-to-be) => validation => product When we'll have that,
> drop the whole spin thing, any spin that isn't fit to be a product
> should be reclassified as remix.
> 
> btw, it wouldn't be wise to define that process while we're still
> in Fedora.Next early stages, it'll just had more entropy. First we
> should work to release our sample products, then use that 
> experience to define the process to bring a new product.
> 

Well, one of the things we need to decide is whether we address Spins
at all during the F21 timeframe. I suspect that QA will ask for a
reprieve on that score.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/

iEYEARECAAYFAlLpbIwACgkQeiVVYja6o6NAOwCfeqNOwmikrZgS2uuVYbSSGmY2
bgAAoKDiszJp7pvgIv8Yn7gBf6Ryu21W
=YCP4
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


More information about the devel mailing list