I'll take a second try at it then.
![]()
Here I'll repeat what I already said. I see Fedora as already great Linux distribution for regular user, with an awesome selection of spins and labs making it really simple and comfy. I like the new mission statement, because it exactly describes my contribution to Fedora, enabling .NET Core. I would like to see Fedora as a friendly environment for dotnet developers, with all the tools necessary to write and run C# code.
And now to add to that, I would like to suggest not including FOSS in the mission statement. It is within the core values, which is where it belongs. I've been met with massive amount of FOSS extremism and hostility to anything remotely associated with non-free/os software. I would like to change that, for the sake of others who are to come, for the sake of having inclusive, diverse and friendly community around Fedora. Let me explain where I'm coming from. I already said what am I working towards, enabling C# and .NET Core in Linux. I receive a lot of hate for the association with the old .net framework, which was closed microsoft product, even though I am promoting open source, and effectively trying to steer the whole C# community towards open source, from my contribution, through articles, to talking at conferences. I think that I'm doing a good thing for FOSS and yet all I ever receive is hate. Please take this into consideration when looking at the mission statement and how it might influence the way people interact with each other about open source development. Forcing FOSS to the extreme is not the right way either, it's our core value, it doesn't have to be what we focus on 100%
Best regards,
Radka
Radka Janeková
.NET Engineer, Red Hat
IRC: radka | Freenode: Rhea
On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 6:54 PM, Josh Boyer <jwboyer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 12:25 PM, Stephen John Smoogen <smooge@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 20 April 2017 at 11:18, Josh Boyer <jwboyer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>>> The Fedora Project creates Free/Open innovative platforms that allows
>>> our community to build tailored solutions for their users.
>>
>> Platform. Singular. We are providing a Platform, not a variety of them.
>>
>> That is part of the mission's focus. We need to provide a common
>> platform across a variety of target environments so that end
>> developers and users have something to consistently rely on to develop
>> or tailor. If we provide multiple platforms it gives us no value,
>> causes resource issues and confusion, and doesn't help us with
>> marketing at all.
>>
>> I'm not meaning to pick on you, and maybe you didn't even think about
>> that aspect. I'm simply using this as an opportunity to highlight
>> what we feel is a very key tenant of the new mission.
>
> I understand, but I don't see it in how we have done things. Mainly
> this is because we aren't clear on the definition of platform. To me a
> platform is what you use to stick things together.. so ostree, old
> releases are 2 different platforms. containers and flatpack are
> different platforms, aarch64, arm, s390, ppc, i386 and x86_64 are all
> different platforms. workstation, server, and whatever 3rd wheel we
> are trying for this release are different platforms.
ostree, isos, rpms, flatpaks, containers are all build artifacts.
That's actually true today too.
aarch64, armv7hl, s390x, ppc64le, x86_64 are all hardware
architectures. Some call them platforms, but 95% of the OS we provide
is identical on all of them so the OS is still the platform on top of
these architectures. Where the OS differs due to architecture
requirements, we'd try to make sure that is hidden below the level of
the platform Fedora is looking to provide.
Workstation, Server, Cloud/Atomic, Spins are actually a great examples
of consumers of the platform and directly relate to the "tailored
solutions" aspect of the mission. They are all using the Fedora
platform to build something that addresses a specific user base.
> So I can see where you are coming from.. but you need to define that
> somewhere to be clear so I can switch my definition of the last 20
> years to this one :).
This is where I would look very hard at Langdon to step in and speak
up. <stares at Langdon>
However, I gave an initial overview in another reply. It's very high
level, so I'm sure we'll be having more discussions around it.
josh
_______________________________________________
council-discuss mailing list -- council-discuss@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to council-discuss-leave@xxxxxxxxdoraproject.org
_______________________________________________ council-discuss mailing list -- council-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to council-discuss-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
