On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 6:47 PM, Matthew Miller <mattdm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 04:19:38PM +0100, drago01 wrote: >> You forgot the part where you explain how / why Fedora.next solves all >> this issues. Some like "cloud and server usage" is more or less clear >> (focus product) but the rest is a bot hand weavy. For instance why >> should any of the changes make people suddenly care about the >> distribution they use if you think they don't. > > To address your "for instance" specifically, I think there's two concrete > steps (which I hope you can see in the Cloud PRD). > > First, emphasize unique things we have at the base level which *should* be > of interest. For example, SELinux around Docker containers makes them have > reasonable security (rather than just being resource division). No one else > has that, so it's a good selling point. (Or will be once it's actually > implemented.) Or, better integration of an orchestration layer (although > that's somethin that we are not readay to tackle yet.) OK that one makes sense. > Second, give people what they *do* care about: choices of language stacks > above the base level, and a layer of separation so that there isn't a big > impact when the base layer changes. To quote someone I talked to: No > distribution does that well, so if you can, you'd really have something > valuable to me. This is again "hand wavy"(sorry for overusing this term). I can already have multiple language stacks for instance python, java, ruby and php on fedora (or pretty much any other distribution) just fine today. And I don't expect it to break when the "base layer" (whatever that means ... kernel? glibc? systemd?) changes. So in that case I didn't even get the problem itself so I cannot comment much on the solution. -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
