On 03/15/2010 09:43 PM, Matthew Woehlke wrote: > Rahul Sundaram wrote: > >> How many contributors are interested in only serving themselves? Is that >> what we want to encourage? >> > I'm going to hazard a guess and say "all of them". It's basic > psychology; people don't do things that have no (perceived) benefit to > them. At most ephemeral, that benefit is "karma". > Well, people can serve themselves but they need to care about more than *only* that. > So you prefer to throw our current contributors under the bus in the > *hope* that by increasing users in general you see an increase in > contributors? > Nope. I haven't said anything along those lines. > Okay. Points for long-term thinking. Not so much for watering down > Fedora into another Ubuntu. > Fedora is inherently different because of several major reasons ( free software focus, upstream contributions etc) so I don't feel any insecurity about all this. > Fedora currently is progressive and aggressive. Maybe moving to > progressive and conservative will work, but the question I have is how > effectively can you be progressive without also being aggressive > Fedora is currently disjoint and acts differently based on which set of packages you are talking about ( KDE vs GNOME, Firefox et all). Progressive and aggressive is all fine as part of development branches as far as I am concerned. Several other distributions take care of this disjoint nature by splitting up the repository and having two different update streams. With a smaller amount of additional maintenance burden, we can do this as well. Rahul -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
