On Wed, 2014-01-29 at 08:57 -0500, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 06:15:49PM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote: > > Just to wax philosophical for a minute: I think there's a lot of value > > in building boring stuff that works well, and I might be weird, but I > > [snip eloquent defense of the virtues of boring basic distro work] > > > This doesn't mean I'm against doing Big Exciting New Things in general > > or Fedora.next in particular, but I do want to stand up for the value of > > just keeping your head down (hah, I know, Adam, practice what you > > preach) and doing good, dull engineering work. With your pocket > > protector firmly in place. > > This is all very convincing. But you also sent me a convincing message the > other week about Fedora's place on the innovation curve and, basically, the > difficulty of doing all that good dull work while being innovative. Stop > convincing me in different directions -- my head will fall off! I have a degree in history. I can argue any side of any issue at the drop of a hat, prior research unnecessary. ;) > Or, in seriousness, because I don't think they're *necessarily* in direct > conflict, Seriously, this is what I think. And in fact, they work together: it's actually quite fascinating that in Fedora we have a place where we can do fairly radical stuff to a 'boring, stable' platform like the OS. That's the strength of the distribution model, I guess: as we've noted before, Fedora often blazes the trail for big hairy changes to things that might otherwise be 'too important to touch'. > what do you think we should do about all of the above? Our mission > and branding, including our foundations, tend to steer away from the dull > and towards new shiny. In fact, whenever we do something that could be > characterized as head-down plodding forward progress instead of a bold leap, > we hear *quite a bit* of sarcasm about the four foundations in the online > chatter. > > So, should we look at reconciling that in some way? Part of *my* idea for > Fedora.next was that the base circle could focus more on this careful and > non-thrilling engineering work while the outer rings could do the > big-exciting things at the same time. (Or even have *some* parts of the > outer rings working on big-exciting, while other parts work on _even more > solid_.) > > *goes and gets coffee. not able to quite express what I mean. hope you > understand anyway* I do entirely, and actually I think we may be rather on the same wavelength for once =) I'm not good at marketing-type stuff, though, so I'm not sure I have an answer for you. I know I have this basic idea that we've outlined above, but that's a tricky message to communicate to people, and I'm not your guy for creative messaging stuff. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net http://www.happyassassin.net -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
