On Thu, Jul 24, 2008 at 8:01 AM, Arthur Pemberton <pemboa@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > I suspect the later. The Fedora name probably does little for their > target market. There is the Fedora mark, the Fedora distribution, and the Fedora process. The fedora mark is what I care about most as a Board member The fedora distribution is what I care about most as a user The fedora process is what I care about most as a contributor. If their real goal is to increase contributor involvement then I personally think they need to leverage as much of our process as they can..and not just the bits in the distribution. I want to make sure the moblin people have an adequate understanding of our process, so we can have a discussion concerning whether or not they can align how they do things for cross-pollination of contributor effort. > Most probably. Fedora is pretty restrictive against non-free software > (which I like) but which > isn't exactly aligned with "just work" consumer devices. I looked at the moblin 2 playground site briefly, I'm not sure I see any specific items which are problematic. I believe I even ran into a statement that they are committed to pushing the kernel patches they are generating upstream for review. So they at least appear to 'get it' when it comes to our view of kernel work. http://www.moblin.org/playground/?q=node/23 The current moblin 1 SDK includes the intel compiler, but that not one of the moblin subprojects and i didn't see any specific discussion in the moblin 2 playground. Honestly, we just don't know enough about why they've moved over to be based on Fedora, or how strong the commitment is to a full open moblin 2 stack. There are hints in the moblin 2 playground pages, but I do not trust articles to always get motivations and intents correctly prioritized. Dirk's blog seems to indicate he's been using F8 and F9 on an EEE machine, so its not a completely blind jump. -jef -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
