Discussion of Fedora Server use-cases

"Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" johannbg at gmail.com
Tue Oct 29 23:53:39 UTC 2013

On 10/29/2013 09:58 PM, Miloslav Trmač wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 5:06 PM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson"
> <johannbg at gmail.com> wrote:
>> If you want people to actually want to package and maintain server
>> applications in the distribution and have them work towards making them
>> "product ready" and be presented and advertised and made available as an
>> "product" the answer to that question is yes we want to strive to cover 500+
>> applications.
> The way I think about it, we should strive to have 500+ "applications"
> available _for_ the Server (whether they are obscure Open Source
> services, or custom company-only functionality developed internall)
> ...

Agreed we need to start small then gradually extend.

>> If you dont want people to contribute to Fedora by not giving them that
>> option or just make products out of what RH maintains or otherwise just want
>> to put competing products at disadvantage ( think 389ds vs openldap, xen vs
>> kvm etc )
> ... but the Server shouldn't ship 500 "services" as an integrated part
> of the product

I'm not sure what you mean by that I'm not talking about a 500 services 
installed and available but rather a core/baseOS with one or more services.

>   (are there even that many services to provide?).

Yes and around 100 unmigrated ones

> Regarding the "competing products", I'd go as far as to say that the
> Server should give the users a "good LDAP server" without exposing
> which upstream project is internally providing the functionality -
> even possibly switching the upstream projects on an upgrade if one of
> them started to fall behind.

That will never work.


More information about the server mailing list