On Fri, Dec 07, 2012 at 10:40:13AM -0500, Jon Masters wrote: > > We could draw them between Core and Extras! > :) Note that just because we got rid of Core doesn't mean that it was a > bad idea. Ubuntu even adopted a "Core" of their own a while back. Maybe The bad idea was the insider-vs-outsider mentality inherent in the way the split was made. I don't think anyone wants to go back to that, and, the above joke aside, I think it's clear that we wouldn't draw the line in the same way, and we would *definitely* have different rules than in those days. To a lot of people who weren't so close to all that, the name "Fedora Core" still has good connotations -- I still often meet people who refer to Fedora as that. I don't know what the balance in the community now is of people who have that kind of rosy-eyed fondness, people who are new and don't have a history either way, and people who remember the Dark Times and would be put off by the name. > they'll have the same experience we had and get away from that, or maybe > Linux distributions should ultimately not be in the business of > providing all+kitchen sink. Speaking only personally, what I want is a > stable core platform of very limited size against which I can install > other packages and stacks. I think we *could* have both. There's no reason that Fedora couldn't make that stable core platform *and* provide layers above it. In fact, referring to https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Overview?rd=FedoraProject:About#Our_Mission it seems pretty clear that both levels are in scope. -- Matthew Miller ☁☁☁ Fedora Cloud Architect ☁☁☁ <mattdm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
