On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 06:49:17PM -0400, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote: > On 08/14/2013 06:04 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote: > >Some projects are objectively better than other projects. Some projects > >may not be objectively better but are more closely aligned with our > >release schedule and support cycles. Some projects are actively > >developed in Fedora and as such can be more cleanly integrated into the > >distribution. > > As soon as we slip that argument no longer stands and we always slip... "We suck, so we should keep on sucking"? Come on. Our inability to maintain a schedule is the result of a wide variety of factors that we can improve, not an inherent reality. > >Making it easier for users to obtain those projects is doing our users a > >service. It is not our responsibility to encourage growth and > >development of other projects that don't make things better for our > >users, and so it's inappropriate to provide equivalent promotion. > > > > You do realize that each sub community is trying to reach out to > their own target users, even an single application might be reaching > to a specific target audience so in that perspective there is no > such thing as "our users". If you visit fedoraproject.org and click on "Download now", you'll get a 64-bit x86 desktop live image. Those are our de-facto target users. The proposal under discussion actually broadens that slightly by making it clearer that we offer three separate first-class products for three different user-cases. You seem to be arguing for a different scenario, one where arbitrary subsets of the Fedora package set are advertised equally. That's not the status quo, and so I think you need to follow this proposal's lead and come up with a solid argument for how your position improves Fedora and what technical and policy changes are needed to get there. > So in other words what to take from your response is that you are > saying that you do not want increased participation in the project > as whole and or only for specific areas of the project? I want increased participation in the creation of Fedora, which is a product with a defined set of software shipped as default. I'm also happy with people working to make it practical to use Fedora as the basis for derived products (such as the spins and remixes), providing that they don't compromise the product that we're producing. -- Matthew Garrett | mjg59@xxxxxxxxxxxxx -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
