On Wed, Sep 28, 2016 at 4:55 PM, Ben Rosser <rosser.bjr@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Sun, Sep 25, 2016 at 9:09 AM, Josh Boyer <jwboyer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > wrote: >> >> Those not using a specific edition at all are on their own, so lumping >> >> them into this problem set isn't really valid. > > > "All on their own" in what sense? They are still users of the distribution, > even if they're not using the distribution's preferred versions. > > They're on their own in that they are not directly supported by and do not > directly benefit from the work done by an edition-specific working group, > sure. Which is, I guess, the root of what I'm actually arguing about here, > and why I would prefer to see this sort of third party policy be > distribution wide rather than edition wide. But it appears to have been So one thing I want to point out is that the inclusion of selected third party repositories is something the Council is taking a very cautious approach to. It's essentially an experiment to see if the argumentation around attracting more users or somehow significantly improving the user experience bears true. We can (and likely will) revisit this again to make sure those things are proving true. I point that out because I don't want people reading this thread to get the idea that Editions are getting something that is majorly important over spins or non-Edition installs. The selection should be very targeted at specific software or user cases that pertain to the Edition. If Spins have similar possibilities, they should bring them to FESCo. josh _______________________________________________ council-discuss mailing list -- council-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to council-discuss-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
