Fedora.NEXT Products and the fate of Spins

Ian Malone ibmalone at gmail.com
Thu Jan 30 00:26:12 UTC 2014

On 30 January 2014 00:01, Ian Malone <ibmalone at gmail.com> wrote:

> Two thoughts:
> 1. Is there scope for a spin to be a particular sub-focus of a product?
> Desktop (all)
> . desktop gnome
> . desktop kde
> . desktop twm (maybe not)
> Server (all)
> . server web
> . server fileserver (or whatever might make sense)
> The idea being that everything under one product should be a
> subdivision of what would be included anyway. I realise there's the
> potential there to snowball again.
> 2. Does the new application gui thing understand package groups or
> collections? Without wishing to spread the whole cli vs gui package
> debate (it's quite happy in the other thread), it seems it might be
> relatively intuitive for someone to understand a 'give me a whole lot
> of music applications' button. That might provide the equivalent of
> what things like design and jam do currently (with the exception of
> availability to areas with poor net access).

And pie in the sky for number 3:
Easier composes so people can share things like embedded system spins
without adding to mirroring or QA overhead. (Composes are not
incredibly difficult if you know what you're doing, but that means
knowing about things like needing to get pre-release kickstarts from
git, set up a mock root (or ideally VM), mess about with selinux). Yes
you can say "host it outside fedora", but it's much easier for someone
to put a .ks up on a blog, github or google code than find decent
hosting for a 500MB image.
(Also I've realised I didn't use the word 'regardless' nearly enough
in my last email.)


More information about the devel mailing list