On 08/27/10 16:09, Jeff Spaleta wrote: > On Fri, Aug 27, 2010 at 2:47 PM, Bob Arendt<rda@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> Actually I think Fedora *should* articulate who the users are, basically >> design and express who and what Fedora is designed for. > <snip> >> I think it would be much better for Fedora to decide what it *should* be, >> specifically what the Fedora userspace should be, and excel at that. > > You have contradicted yourself a little bit here. And maybe its a > language barrier so I'll be explicit. > > Who the users are now and who our users should be are not necessarily > the same group. Polling our current user-base doesn't necessarily help > us define who are users should be. And similarly polling our current > user-base doesn't necessarily help us identify what we need to do > better to better find and serve the users who should be using Fedora. > Nor does it necessarily help us focus on the needs on any particular > group that currently exists. We have some users who want A. We have > some users who want B. That's what a survey will tell us, it won't > help us judge the value of A relative to the value of B as a focus. > > -jef My first statement was poorly phrased. Fedora should state it's principles, properties, use-cases, plant it's flag, and call for users that are interested in these characteristics to rally around it. Fedora seems to do this from time to time; My point is that it should continue to do this. The real people who should decide that direction are the contributors - it's where the project's strength and energy comes from. Developers, testers, etc. Poll your contributors - polling the userbase adds noise. Fedora should stick with it's Meritocratic roots. .. of course, not being a significant contributor, I've disenfranchised myself. But I'm still a strong Fedora follower and enjoy the distribution. Cheers, -Bob Arendt -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
