Matthew Miller píše v Po 22. 07. 2013 v 09:38 -0400: > Conclusion > --- > > * Refocus Core to provide a better platform for building on > * Make room for innovation at the "Ring 2" level > * Empower SIGs to create solutions that fit > * Won't break what we have > * And we can start right now > > So there we have it. Comments and discussion, please! The proposal looks frankly very cloud-centric. I have no problem with that. What else should a Fedora cloud architect propose? But I'd like to know a few things: Is the proposal based at least a bit on some kinda of analysis of our more successful competitors in the cloud area? Yeah, I'm speaking about Ubuntu which currently holds 50 percent of the market. Ubuntu has been very successful in the cloud and in the proposal I really don't see a lot of things that Ubuntu has/does better and Fedora doesn't have/does worse. I just want to make sure that we won't turn the whole Fedora upside down to make us more successful in the cloud and then find out that something completely different was making us unsuccessful and competitors successful. IMHO closings gaps between the competitors and us and staying excellent in our strong areas would probably be probably a safer strategy than turning everything upside down. BTW speaking of Ubuntu, I think they've got quite different strategy - one tightly integrated product across all uses (server, cloud, desktop, and now maybe even tablets and phones). To solve the problem of newer versions, special interests etc., they've got the ecosystem of PPAs. That's where third-party entities can deliver software the way they want. And AFAIK it has been widely popular with upstream projects because they've got free hands with PPAs. And Ubuntu still has one defined product and doesn't have to lower standards for software inclusion. IMHO it's a better solution than breaking the distribution into several parts with different speed of development and different quality standards from which you can build all kinds of fragmented products. At least from the marketing point of view. As a user, I'd rather use a well-defined distribution with one set of quality standards (and if I wanted something special, I'd easily enable a third-party repo for that) than a distro with well-defined core, but not so well-defined layers of grey zone above it. Just my 2c, Jiri -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
