2014-03-23 3:48 GMT+01:00 Kevin Kofler <kevin.kof...@chello.at>:
> Miloslav Trmač wrote:
> > When we say that there should be "high bar" for becoming a Fedora
> Product,
> > that means that there should be few of them,
>
> I see this repeated over and over by several people. This strikes me as
> quite the opposite of being inclusive.
>
(These are my personal opinions, official FESCo position is what has been
voted on in the meetings, and so far does not go into such detail AFAIK.)
I don't think that's the case. Fedora is obviously open to including
individual packages and large multi-package projects that are very far from
the mainstream. "Fedora Product"-like efforts can, and do, happen outside
of the Fedora umbrella--the major desktop environments to date have been a
typical example--and the results of such efforts can, and are, included in
the Fedora universe, as individual packages, comps groups, or spins.
Fedora Products involve *bidirectional* coordination with the Fedora
universe: not only "which version of upstream's project should we package
so that we fit Fedora's schedule", but also the opposite, and "we need to
change $this so that that-other-Fedora-product can do something useful".
Such coordination is much more practical if there are only a few Products,
not dozens of them, if they have a fairly large number of contributors that
watch what is happening around the other Products, and if they have
consistent requirements, which is easiest to achieve by minimizing the
overlap = potential for conflicts between Products. (What would we do with
three desktop Products, one wanting X, one Mir, one Wayland, or one of them
asking for bionic libc?)
IMHO, ALL the current Spins should automatically become Products (or the
> whole Products idea dropped in favor of the existing Spins system that just
> worked).
>
I don't think most spins *want* to become Products, with voting bodies and
bi-weekly liaison discussions at FESCo; as far as packaging an interesting
collection of upstream software, such overhead (useful for
coordinating *specifically
Fedora-targeted* development efforts) isn't helpful.
I don't think any Fedora contributor should need to sign up to work on a
full-fledged Product in order to have their voice heard, their work
included, the work judged on its merits, or, to be more specific to KDE, to
have the possibility to be release-blocking or to be visibly featured on
the "Get Fedora" pages; for all I know, it might well make sense to feature
some kind of KDE spin more visibly than the Fedora Server product.
Mirek
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
