On 09/11/2013 04:18 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
At this point, what I'd_really_ like is your help in making this work going forward. From what you've said, I don't think we're really all that far out of alignment, and maybe we can bring that together.
There is alot of alignment in how I see us going forward as are in your proposal however there is a fundamental difference in what you are proposing and what I'm proposing we should do.
What I see us going forward with is the core/baseOS "FedoraOS" that the community delivers at large while the sub community they themselves set the direction, their target audience and deliver "their" product on top of the stable foundation we provide them with, the "FedoraOS".
You want to limit the project to three "official default products" that the community delivers at large, which to me, does not solve existing problem in our community, narrows down the "scope" of the project as well as hinders innovation and participation while I want to liberate the community from the shackles of the "default" thus finally put the default skeletons to their grave, reduce the "bureaucracy" and allow for more innovation. more products, and faster adoption for us as an community in whole to the constantly changing open source environment and have us contribute shaping that landscape.
Due to the fundamental difference in our proposal I'm not seeing where we could meet half way through, on a common grounds in them ( i'm all ears if you have a starting point ).
And since we are setting the direction for the project for the next 5 - 10 years we as a community need to give this some serious thought if something like what you proposed is the way forward ( tying us down to 3 products ) or if we should move into the direction of what I propose in that time.
JBG -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
