[Fedora-spins] Board SWG questions for Spins SIG

[Kevin Fenzi]

On Sun, 14 Feb 2010 20:46:30 -0600
Matt Domsch <matt at domsch.com> wrote:

> As you may be aware, the Fedora Project Board is trying to set a more
> clear vision for what Fedora is, and should be going forward.  One
> aspect of this conversation is Fedora's target audience.  As Spins and
> Remixes specifically seek to use Fedora to reach a particular audience
> or cater to specific use cases, we seek your input to help guide our
> thinking.
> 
> Your responses to these questions would be appreciated.  Fellow Board
> member Colin Walters and I have agreed to poll the Spins SIG and
> report back to the Strategic Working Group and the Board as a whole.
> 
> Board-level Question:
> Can Spins/SIGS or Fedora remixes define their own target audience?

I would think so. 

> Background
> 
> The Board has been working on defining a target audience for
> Fedora. In response to this, some people feel that Fedora should allow
> sub-groups to define their own target audience. Or even more strongly
> that Spins/SIGs should be the only groups defining target audience; in
> other words, the Board should not be defining one. An example mail
> supporting this position is this mail from Toshio [1].
> 
> However, the potential conflict between a Board target audience and a
> SIG target audience is still theoretical. No SIG appears to have
> explicitly disagreed with the "working" target audience proposal.
> 
> Possible Solutions
> 
>    1. Board sets target audience broadly, spins tailor to a subset
>    thereof.

This would stifle a spin that had a audience that happened to be
outside whatever the target was set to, for no real gain, IMHO. 

>    2. Board sets target audience broadly, spins tailor to either a
>    subset thereof, or to additional audiences outside that scope so
>    long as there are no conflicts.

I perfer this one. 

>    3. Board does not set target audience, leaves it to each Spin to
>    set their specific target audience.
>          1. requires spins to be much more than consumers of Fedora
>    content.
>          2. audience of some spins may overlap. That's OK.
>          3. audience of some spins may technically conflict. How to
>    resolve conflicts? Spins SIG -> FESCo -> Board.

I guess this one is ok too. 

> As members of the Spins SIG, how do you view the above, and how would
> you like to see Spins interact with the larger Project with respect to
> defining target audiences?

Each spin should define their audience. It shouldn't be anything
opposed to Fedora's goals (ie, should be free software, etc). 

> Board-level Question:
> Can Spins/SIGS or Fedora remixes change the code enough to meet their
> goals?

Sure. 

> Background
> 
> In the present situation, Spins must take all of their content from
> the official Fedora repositories. Remixes may take content from
> wherever, and modify as they see fit, but may not use the primary
> Fedora trademarks.
> 
> Questions for Spins and the Spins SIG
> 
> Given the present situation:
> 
>    1. Has any Spin found the present situation unduly restrictive?
>          1. If so, how specifically? 

Not here. 

>    2. Has any Spin found they cannot address their target audience
>          properly?
>          1. If so, in what way?
>          2. Is the root problem that all packages must be in the
>          official repositories?

Not here. 
 
>    3. How are you addressing this today?
>    4. How would you like to address this in the future?
>    5. Are the resources you would need readily available?
>          1. If not, what would you need to properly address this? 
>    6. Is the transition from "Spin" to "Remix" onerous?
>          1. If so, what can be done to make it less so? 

I don't do any remixes, and I think anything called Fedora should use
it's pool of packages. 

In the event of a conflict between spins/groups, they should discuss a
technical solution, if none can be worked out they can bring it to
fesco, if nothing can happen there it can be taken to the Board. I
think the number of such cases is very small and not worth worrying
about. :) 

kevin
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/spins/attachments/20100218/93cfc26c/attachment.bin