|| ||"Tom \"spot\" Callaway" <tcallawa-AT-redhat.com> |
|| ||Fedora community advisory board <advisory-board-AT-lists.fedoraproject.org> |
|| ||Re: Proposal for the future of Fedora |
|| ||Mon, 23 Aug 2010 16:55:38 -0400|
|| ||Article, Thread
On 08/23/2010 03:17 PM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 23, 2010 at 12:09, Rahul Sundaram <email@example.com> wrote:
>> On 08/23/2010 08:41 PM, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>>> My apologies, that statement came out more inflammatory and damning than
>>> I really intended it to be. I was merely trying to highlight that a lot
>>> of people have a view of Fedora as sort of the "White Sands" of Linux.
>>> They view it as where code goes until it's ready to be put into stable
>>> releases. This is a public impression that we need to change.
>> It is not very inaccurate. We are certainly early adopters of new
>> technology and sometimes it is rough around the edges. We can either be
>> more conservative or try and test things more vigorously. Probably a
>> combination of both would help.
> It does not matter if it is not accurate or not. It is the one thing
> that I get over and over from people who used some release and found
> their system completely 'different' after a set of updates. "How can
> you guys expect this to be the next Enterprise Linux?" Sure they each
> want something new and cool on our system that no-one else has yet..
> but they really only want that not everything else. All of them have
> switched to 'other' OS's because while slower they could get better
> stability on what they wanted to remain stable.
I think part of this may simply be a need to set expectations appropriately.
There is some irony in the fact that the most common questions I get
asked are "What is new in Fedora $CURRENT?" and "What is coming in
Fedora $CURRENT+1", and the most common complaint I hear is "Why did you
change $FOO in Fedora $CURRENT?!?".
to post comments)