I'll admit that I've never quite understood the market for Fedora Server (I am running Fedora on a server at home, but it's really a KDE desktop masquerading as a server). I am definitely in favor of working toward having CentOS Stream stand in for Fedora Server. I think it better fits the use case we're targeting and reduces some of the confusion. For the other points, I agree in general, but I wonder how it would work in practice. If the CentOS Llama SIG and the Fedora Llama SIG merge, they'll still have to follow Fedora's rules for their Fedora output and CentOS's rules for their CentOS output (assuming they decide it makes sense to have output in both places. If they say "llama herding is too fast-moving to need a long-term OS", for example, they can ditch the CentOS output and then it doesn't matter.) This shouldn't be taken as me being opposed, because I do think we should take advantage of the synergy where it exists, but I also wonder how much of it actually exists beyond the basic infrastructure level. -- Ben Cotton He / Him / His Fedora Program Manager Red Hat TZ=America/Indiana/Indianapolis _______________________________________________ council-discuss mailing list -- council-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to council-discuss-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/council-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
