On Thu, Oct 08, 2009 at 08:11:18AM -0500, Mike McGrath wrote: >On Thu, 8 Oct 2009, Josh Boyer wrote: > >> On Wed, Oct 07, 2009 at 10:18:48PM -0500, Mike McGrath wrote: >> >On Wed, 7 Oct 2009, Josh Boyer wrote: >> >> >5) By F15 I'd like to see a killer virtualization management system in >> >> >Fedora. What we have now is a lot of disparate tools. All of which are >> >> >getting better, none of which are on the level with the likes of vmware. >> >> >> >> OK, confused. 2, 3, and 5 seem to have nothing to do with Fedora itself. >> >> Additionally, 5 here seems to be based on the assumption that the Fedora >> >> project is a development organization or that we control development >> >> resources that we can direct. I don't think either is true. I think Fedora >> >> is a _showcase_ for development that happens elsewhere. >> >> >> > >> >yet 2, 3, and 5 have all been hackfests or discussion points at the last >> >two fudcons I've attended. Also, that's kind of my point. They don't >> >have much to do with Fedora at the moment. But I'd like to see us do >> >them. Just like NM typically gets its changes here first. We can through >> >resources and help at upstream projects more for even better relationships >> >with upstream. This is just doing more of what we are already good at. >> >> NM is showcased here first. I'm pretty sure all the NM changes are still >> going into upstream before they actually show up in a Fedora RPM. >> > >But that's not to say it's not tightly coupled with Fedora. When there's >a NM problem, people go in #fedora-devel and ping Dan Williams. When >there's a problem with yum they do the same thing to Seth. There are >several other examples. It's because Fedora is where a great deal of this >type of development is happening. This extremely low barrier to upstream >is what I'm talking about. Fedorahosted makes this even easier. I'll concede that point. >> >> Now, I'm well aware of the fact that Red Hat (and other companies) pay >> >> people to work "on Fedora". However I think the actual development is done >> >> in the upstream projects and Fedora just happens to be the test/delivery >> >> vehicle for that work. The Fedora project also doesn't dictate what those >> >> developers do. >> >> >> > >> >Something I want to see changed. I'd like to have facilities to do this >> >more in Fedora. We're starting to have this stuff like we didn't before. >> >> I'm sorry, but I'm not sure what you mean by any of that. What exactly do >> you want to see changed? What facilities would you like to have? What are >> we starting to have more of? >> > >Upstream developers regularly come to me (as the Infrastructure Lead) >Looking for additional resources to do X or Y. I'd like to start >providing that. This comes both in terms of just guests to do testing, as >well as infrastructure for clients on our installed userbase to do >reporting back for various information. I see. I was more focusing on the 'we can't dictate what developers do' part, while you were focusing on making it easier for upstream to do what they want. That's fine. josh _______________________________________________ fedora-advisory-board mailing list fedora-advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
