Thoughts on Fedora Server lifecycle

["Jóhann B. Guðmundsson"]

On 11/05/2013 12:38 PM, Simo Sorce wrote:
> On Tue, 2013-11-05 at 11:43 +0000, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
>> On 11/05/2013 11:35 AM, Dennis Jacobfeuerborn wrote:
>>
>>> If the cloud WG limits itself to the guest end of things shouldn't
>>> it really be called "cloud guest WG"? cloud WG sounds like it deals
>>> with *everything* concerning cloud deployments.
>> The hosting and running the cloud itself is an server role if not we
>> wind up having to split the server WG into thousand parts...
>>
> I do not totally agree with this view.
> A cloud host is a very specialized minimal install that normally just
> needs the hypervisor and an agent to run VMs, and pretty much nothing
> else. I do not see it as a general use case for the Server WG that
> should rather deal with fully functional machines.

That depends on your definition of fully functional machine?

I'm going to go so far and say we should be packaging man 
pages/documentation even sh completions separately in a sub-package for 
components in the distribution after all we need to be able to install 
bare minimal stuff into server application OS containers.

I would think our products would contain only the coreOS+the "modern" 
tools used to manage that server application or application stack as in 
not to be running around installing *everything* we think the 
administrator might use.

If we cant do that we need to deliver multiple version of "products" as 
in "slim" "fat" versions


JBG