From Fedora Project Wiki
No edit summary |
|||
| (2 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Admon/note|We have agreed to a Default Offering|This page is written on the basis that the concept of a Default Offering (or ''Primary Spin'' as used below) is firmly established; see [[User:Pfrields/Different_default_offering]]}} | {{Admon/note|We have agreed to a Default Offering|This page is written on the basis that the concept of a Default Offering (or ''Primary Spin'' as used below) is firmly established; see [[User:Pfrields/Different_default_offering]]}} | ||
| Line 29: | Line 28: | ||
=== Package Universe === | === Package Universe === | ||
+ Simplifies involvement in packaging -- a Fedora package is part of the distribution | * + Simplifies involvement in packaging -- a Fedora package is part of the distribution | ||
+ Encourages experimentation with alternative subsystems and technology that are incompatible with the primary spin | * + Encourages experimentation with alternative subsystems and technology that are incompatible with the primary spin | ||
+ Encourages a rich ecosystem of different spins | * + Encourages a rich ecosystem of different spins | ||
- No clear compatibility target for packages | * - No clear compatibility target for packages | ||
=== Default Offering / Primary Spin === | === Default Offering / Primary Spin === | ||
| Line 39: | Line 38: | ||
* - Makes the primary spin composition very important, possible point of contention | * - Makes the primary spin composition very important, possible point of contention | ||
* - Devalues others spins and alternate subsystem groups (e.g., KDE) | * - Devalues others spins and alternate subsystem groups (e.g., KDE) | ||
* - Places a lot of technical decisions for the product in the hands of the Desktop group, which is primarily composed of | * - Places a lot of technical decisions for the product in the hands of the Desktop group, which is primarily composed of Red Hat employees | ||
== | == Resolution == | ||
* Discussed at the [[Meeting:Board_strategic_working_group_2010-02-15#What_is_Fedora_the_Distribution.3F| SWG meeting on 2010-02-15]] | |||
[[Category:Strategic working group]] | [[Category:Strategic working group]] | ||
Latest revision as of 22:55, 1 April 2010
We have agreed to a Default Offering
This page is written on the basis that the concept of a Default Offering (or Primary Spin as used below) is firmly established; see User:Pfrields/Different_default_offering
This page is written on the basis that the concept of a Default Offering (or Primary Spin as used below) is firmly established; see User:Pfrields/Different_default_offering
Issue
How is the Fedora distribution defined? Is it a universe of packages, a specific spin, or is it something else?
Background
- It is established and accepted that the Fedora Project has multiple, valuable products or results, including the development of technology, process, and community. However, the Project also has a main product, which is the Fedora distribution.
- The predecessors to the current Fedora distribution (Fedora Core and Red Hat Linux) had a very clearly defined, bootable and installable form, which fit on either a DVD or (earlier) one or more CDs. It was possible to install all packages without significant conflict.
- The current Fedora distribution consists of a package set which does not fit onto a single DVD (and would barely fit on a Blu-Ray disc). Multiple bootable and installable subsets of this package set are composed and distributed (spins). It's considered unwise to install all of the packages because some are very specialized, multiple packages provide alternate forms of the same functionality, and there are package conflicts.
- The question is this: which is the main product of the Fedora Project? What are we trying to produce?
Possible Solutions
The Fedora distribution could be considered in many different ways. Here are two of the main ways of viewing the distribution product:
- A Package Universe
- This universe may be distributed as various installable/bootable subsets
- Spins are highly valued, and the primary spin is first among equals
- The Default Offering or Primary Spin
- The distribution is has a clearly-identifiable bootable/installable form
- Other spins can be prepared, but are not the primary focus of the distribution
Risk/Benefit Analysis
As pros and cons:
Package Universe
- + Simplifies involvement in packaging -- a Fedora package is part of the distribution
- + Encourages experimentation with alternative subsystems and technology that are incompatible with the primary spin
- + Encourages a rich ecosystem of different spins
- - No clear compatibility target for packages
Default Offering / Primary Spin
- + Maintains a tighter focus - clear compatibility target for packages
- - Makes the primary spin composition very important, possible point of contention
- - Devalues others spins and alternate subsystem groups (e.g., KDE)
- - Places a lot of technical decisions for the product in the hands of the Desktop group, which is primarily composed of Red Hat employees
Resolution
- Discussed at the SWG meeting on 2010-02-15