On Mon, Dec 8, 2008 at 6:38 AM, Steve Grubb <sgrubb@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Just wanted to let you know I am thinking about this. I need to think though > what this does to our project and how to make sure we still get the right > outcome. Cool beans. Fedora as a project is pulled in a lot of different, competing directions, the more modular we can be, the better able this project can be as a platform for a wider range of well defined but non-compatible usage cases embodies as a selection of Spins or kickstart files. The CAPP capability stuff you are doing is just one example among many. While I personally don't grok the full value of CAPP, I can totally see the capability as part of the Fedora platform being really attractive aspect of Fedora coupled with our appliance-tools feature for someone in the business of building appliances . Being able to build appliance images which are CAPP certifiable might be a great thing for a number of business entities that I would personally never need to do business with for my computing needs. Correct me if I'm wrong, but is CAPP certification primarily going to be a server oriented feature? If that's the case, you should probably get feedback from the newly ordained server SIG about alternative implementation approaches. I'm most definitely not going to be a consumer of CAPP certification, so my feedback on implementation choices isn't going to be as valuable as those in your core target..which I imagine is server admins. -jef -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
