Server Admins: Why not Fedora?

["Jóhann B. Guðmundsson"]

On 11/07/2013 08:22 PM, Miloslav Trmač wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 3:25 PM, Simo Sorce <simo at redhat.com> wrote:
>> I came into this thinking we wee going to build a Server oriented
>> distribution on top of the core, but since yesterday's meeting I am not
>> so sure that is the goal anymore, it seem people want to do specialized
>> sub-server 'products' (whatever that means, and I agree with mizmo it's
>> a confusing term to use).
>>
>> I really would like some more clarity of goals for each WG.
> I think we basically "own the server space for Fedora", and how
> exactly we decide to cover it is up to us.  If the our plan is not
> clear, or there is a disagreement, let's keep talking and get it
> resolved.

Agreed

>
>  From my point of view, the "specialized products" / "featured
> application stacks" view means that we want to achieve more
> inter-package integration and more common functionality, than a
> "server oriented distribution" typically does, and in particular more
> than Fedora has been doing.

Agreed if we dont do that and leave things as they are there is no point 
in continue this effort

> And the talk about products seems to reflect an implicit consensus to
> get there one "application stack" at a time, rather than to cover all
> applications from the start, and add one distribution-wide feature at
> a time to all applications.

Agreed but before we start on the application stack we need to decide 
which tools and api should be on the server platform itself.

JBG