Current beta release announcement at:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/F25_Beta_release_announcement#Fedora_Atomic
Tries to be cautiously optimistic - do not want user frustration from
initial attempts, but still want people who have the time to try it out.
On 10/05/2016 10:30 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
On Wed, Oct 05, 2016 at 10:57:49AM -0700, Josh Berkus wrote:
So, I'm looking at this from a user perspective.
* F25 is announced
* User goes to getfedora.org, sees new "atomic" icon.
* User clicks through
* User sees that Atomic is still F24.
From that point, one of two things happens:
1. User files a bug, and we're flooded with "atomic download page not
updated" bugs, or
2. user decides that Atomic isn't a real thing and never goes back.
I don't think we'd leave the Atomic page with F24 with no explanation.
There's _already_ an explanation around the two-week cycle, and that
can just be expanded a bit — again, in the case where it doesn't happen
to be ready, which isn't necessarily where we're at.
I really don't see a flow that results in the user checking back two
weeks later to see if Atomic has been updated yet. Especially since
we're dealing with a substantial issue with SELinux and it's not
guaranteed that there will be an F25 atomic release 2 weeks later, either.
They shouldn't have to check back; it should be part of the normal flow
of updates.
I can't see any situation where "come back in six months!" is a
_better_ alternative.
You are the Project Leader, and you can certainly say "do it anyway".
But please understand why I think it's not a great idea.
Well, here's some background thinking: new Fedora versions do not
appear to be, in general, big drivers of user adoption. There's a spike
of downloads the first week of a release, but it's a fraction of the
total downloads for a release. And, each release keeps growing in use
over its lifecycle until the next comes out. Basically, people are
coming for Fedora, and getting whatever version happens to be current.
This is one of the reasons behind dropping unique release names, and
shortly after, focusing on the Editions — rather than making a big deal
about Schrödinger's Cat vs. Heisenbug, the marketing push should be
around Atomic, Workstation, and Server individually.
The release does give us an excuse for PR, but it's my sense that two
releases a year is a little overwhelming for that — we are still
getting F24 reviews coming in. And, since column inches are
(figuratively these days!) limited, generally the press we get is 90%
desktop, with only mentions of Atomic and Server, so that benefit is
dubious for Atomic anyway.
_______________________________________________
cloud mailing list -- cloud@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
