On 03/25/2014 01:24 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 09:17:20PM +0100, Reindl Harald wrote:
For the record Fedora is not a bleeding edge distro anymore or first in anything
maybe some people should consider the difference between "leading" and "bleeding"
smart: leading if things are ready
dumb: bleeding for any price
I agree with Harald here. I think some people have always wanted it to be,
but Fedora never really has been chartered to be "bleeding". To quote the
"first" foundation more fully:
First represents our commitment to innovation. We are not content to let
others do all the heavy lifting on our behalf; we provide the latest in
stable and robust, useful, and powerful free software in our Fedora
distribution.
Note "latest in stable and robust", not "latest bleeding edge". There is
supposed to be a balance here.
Leading and bleeding go hand in hand being "first"
In this particular case we already are years behind Arch and soon to be
behind OpenSuse and others aswell.
So if this is the case when people want to modernize and cleanup the
distribution then perhaps it's time for the board revisit and redefine
the foundation for firs so contributors can avoid Fedora and move to
more acceptable distribution of their contributions like Arch if they
want to be part of distribution that is leading and is "first".
JBG
--
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
