2014-03-26 8:47 GMT+01:00 Mathieu Bridon <bochecha@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>: > On Wed, 2014-03-26 at 08:27 +0100, Robert Mayr wrote: [snip] >> I think the same, if all spins become products we can also keep the >> actual way. Fedora.next is a very good idea and I'm sure it will have >> success, but it needs to follow his strategy with three different >> products, not having 2 different ones and *n* >> workstation-similar-products, IMHO. > > Some spins won't be desktop-related. Yes sure, I was thinking about desktop spins. > Maybe what we'd need is something like AUR where users contribute > packages for Arch Linux which are not "supported" enough to be in the > main repositories? > > We could have the official 3 (for now) products, and a different "place" > where the wider community can gather to publish different images, each > one with a different focus (e.g a KDE desktop, or a tailor-made cloud > image for a new provider, or an arch-specific image for a > yet-unsupported device, or...) > > We could even call that "place" spins.fedoraproject.org ;) > > It could be more open than the current spins process, allowing a wider > community to publish more varied things than we have now (more spins!), > and it would be up to each group to ensure the quality of what they > produce, have their own release cycle, etc... > > > -- > Mathieu Why not, I would feel much more comfortable with this kind of solution or something similar than having a lot of main products. I would also like this because we could have more images for different focus, and at this point we probably should also keep only the 3 main products as release-blockers. -- Robert Mayr (robyduck) -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
