Re: Proposal: delay F31 release to work out infrastructure and lifecycle challenges

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Mon, Nov 26, 2018 at 5:05 PM Matthew Miller <mattdm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Nov 16, 2018 at 09:50:33AM -0500, Paul Frields wrote:
> > Here's the summary from the page, which proposes we pause the release
> > after F30 for these efforts:
>
> I know it was a big time-off holiday week in the US, but I expected a little
> more interest in this post.

Hi Matthew,

I initially basically ignored the previous E-Mail,  because it didn't
come from a person I knew, and - from quickly glancing over the
contents - read like marketing fluff. I should have dug deeper there,
but we all only have limited time.

> Perhaps it seemed like too much text to digest
> along with turkey and stuffing. :) I'm highlighting it with a subject
> reflecting the big, direct impact, and here's some other top-level
> proposals:

This is definitely getting more attention. Maybe the initial E-Mail
should have had a less bland Subject line, too ;)

> * embrace Taiga (an open source kanban tool) for project planning
> * fix the compose speed (target: one hour!)
> * really actually for real gated Rawhide
> * better CI pipeline tests for everything
> * better tooling for non-base deliverables
> * better metrics for everything

Those all sound like good things to work on.

> * define a base platform -- Red Hat wants to focus resources here

This point though ... hmm. Also kind of mentioned on the linked wiki page:

> #3 (...) Define a small, draft set of content for the Platform which can iterate over time

What exactly does that mean? Moving to something two-tiered like the
ubuntu model (main / universe) - which I think is a terrible solution?
(And what would be the names for this in fedora - "core" and "extras"?
(pun definitely intended))

Also, I find it funny that - somehow - tons of resources would be
available for "better CI pipeline tests for everything" (!), but we'd
have to "focus resources" when it comes to the fedora "platform"
itself.

I hope my response doesn't read overly negative or critical - but I
think some fedora contributors (including me) have been weary of
something like this ("focusing resources") since the IBM news got
announced.

Fabio

> Please read https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Objectives/Lifecycle/Problem_statements
> and comment in this thread.
>
> --
> Matthew Miller
> <mattdm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Fedora Project Leader
> _______________________________________________
> devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx




[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Users]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora Testing]     [Fedora Formulas]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kernel Development]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Desktop]     [PAM]     [Red Hat Development]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]

  Powered by Linux