On 15 April 2017 at 14:08, Neal Gompa <ngompa13@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Sat, Apr 15, 2017 at 1:51 PM, Stephen John Smoogen <smooge@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On 14 April 2017 at 22:10, Neal Gompa <ngompa13@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 9:55 AM, Matthew Miller >>> <mattdm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >>> It's also worth pointing out that if people are seeing it as >>> uninteresting and boring, then perhaps we just need a better message >>> around why it's exciting to help develop a fully featured Free >>> operating system. The new message may even help in that, but we have >>> to remember that we haven't actually "won" the war for Free and Open >>> Source software. There are all-new battles to fight and some of the >>> same old battles are there too. >>> >>> Please consider integrating these core aspects into a new mission draft. >> >> >> I am not disagreeing with your feeling, but working with mission >> statements aren't one of those things which do well with statements >> like "Please consider". Offer a patch or don't expect the change to >> move forward or in the way you wanted. [Think of it like telling the >> kernel people it would be nice if they considered implementing for the >> sound card in your computer... they can say they did but since they >> have no idea what that would be like.. didn't.] >> > > I guess I could suggest something, like... > > Fedora creates an innovative operating system platform built on > free and open source software that lights up hardware, clouds, > and containers for software developers and community members > to build tailored solutions for their users. > > How is that? That wasn't even that difficult. But I wanted to know why > they felt it was okay to leave those bits out in the first place. > That wording implies it was done by malice. It makes people defensive even if it was "You know what.. we just assumed everyone would know that." A mission statement needs to be short and to the point. The more stuff you cram in there the less anyone remembers anything about it (they will tend to either focus on their little bit over others or how the others dwarf their little bit). Personally I think the original one was too long but I am a grumpy old coot. Since I have said that.. I will propose my patch The Fedora Project creates innovative platforms built on Free and Open source software that allows developer and operators build tailored solutions for their users. It is probably still too long but I don't like calling it devops as that is too specific a term which may go out of fashion in a year or so. I dropped hardware as people are going to start wanting specific hardware.. I dropped containers and clouds because they are again fashionable terms which can fall out of favor faster than we like. All of those are implied by platforms. > The thing I couldn't quite figure out how to fit into the new language > was showing we still care about the Linux desktop and other more > conventional avenues. As it is, it feels a bit exclusionary from that. > Any suggestions? I believe that is what the Workstation group needs to add to their mission statement. Otherwise you end up with a large contingent of "why not us" who just add in stop energy to the people who did get included. > > > -- > 真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth! > _______________________________________________ > council-discuss mailing list -- council-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > To unsubscribe send an email to council-discuss-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx -- Stephen J Smoogen. _______________________________________________ council-discuss mailing list -- council-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to council-discuss-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
