On Thu, Jul 24, 2008 at 11:29 AM, Jeff Spaleta <jspaleta@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > 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 What are your thoughts on the reason given? RPM had one feature that was needed. But from what I've heard/read from others, RPM is lacking many other features (better compression methods for example). RPM has been (seemingly) pretty stagnant. -- 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
