On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 7:17 PM, Jeff Spaleta <jspaleta@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 1:59 PM, Peter Robinson <pbrobinson@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> Very cool news. I look forward to the SIG, the spin and seeing Fedora >> on even more cool devices :-) >> >> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/07/23/moblin_reworked/ > > Here's what's not clear.... is intel going to look to talk with us > about making this part of the larger Fedora project or is it going to > be a downstream derived distribution that will include components such > that it can not carry the Fedora name? I suspect the later. The Fedora name probably does little for their target market. > Or are they planning to just > leverage the existing Fedora distribution bits and do their own thing > in a way that isn't aligned with existing Fedora contribution > guidance? Most probably. Fedora is pretty restrictive against non-free software (which I like) but which isn't exactly aligned with "just work" consumer devices. > Have I missed a discussion concerning Moblin interaction > with Fedora in the "project" sense? If I have please point me to it so > I can read up. No idea. > A number of questions spring to mind, chief among them whether the new > Moblin can be incorporated under our secondary arch policy? How > different is the Atom processor anyways? If they are serious about > making this more attractive to developers, I think we need to have a > serious discussion about whether or not the technical work they are > doing can and should live under the Fedora project umbrella. > Can/Should Moblin be the part of the Fedora project aimed at mobile > devices? Sharing to some extent policy, best practices guidance, and > contributor-base. Or should it sit outside our project completely? > > -jef Good luck. -- Fedora 7 : sipping some of that moonshine ( www.pembo13.com ) -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
