On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 4:52 PM, Matthew Miller <mattdm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: <snip good info> > I think this is something on the order of an Objective rather than just > a change/feature proposal because it's actually a rather tall order. On > the technical side, currently OpenShift can't be easily packaged > because it includes some 200+ Go libraries, and we don't even have > approved Go packaging guidelines. This probably means we'd be asking > for a very large bundling exception (note 'Active upstream Security > Team' as part of the justification). On the less technical but still > important side, I'd like to see related marketing and documentation, > and coordination with Fedora Atomic and the Fedora Cloud WG, and > possibly with Fedora Server as well (I know OpenShift node as server > role is already under some consideration). > > Thoughts, comments, thrown vegetables? Do you have someone in mind to lead this objective? If so, is there a reason they didn't propose this themselves? josh _______________________________________________ council-discuss mailing list council-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/council-discuss The Fedora Project's mission is to lead the advancement of free and open source software and content as a collaborative community.
