On 03/13/2015 02:04 PM, Michael P. McGrath wrote: > I get that there are several offerings that Fedora has, I don't feel > compelled to list them all on projectatomic.io to people who likely won't > have the information to make an informed decision anyway. We pick one > for them, give a few word description on what it is, and set them loose. But people will find the Fedora offerings through other channels, then wind up on ProjectAtomic and wonder why the documentation there doesn't fit what they have (as one example). I'm not arguing against the alignment of Fedora == newest, CentOS == stable, RHEL == Supported. I'm saying I think it would benefit us all to align on one Atomic offering from Fedora rather than having competing Fedora-based offerings that are going to be misunderstood / hard to clarify. (Not to mention dilute efforts w/r/t testing and promotion between Fedora and Project Atomic.) Best, jzb -- Joe Brockmeier | Project Atomic Doer of Things jzb@xxxxxxxxxx | http://community.redhat.com/ Twitter: @jzb | http://dissociatedpress.net/
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ cloud mailing list cloud@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/cloud Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
