From Fedora Project Wiki
Roll Call
- Attendees: John Poelstra, Paul Frields, Matt Domsch, Colin Walters, Mike McGrath
- Regrets: Chris Tyler
Default Distribution Offering
- Owner: Paul Frields
- Question being answered: "On what basis do we have a default offering?"
- Original page: User:Pfrields/Different_default_offering
- Added page: User:Pfrields/Current_default_offering
- After some discussion group felt Paul should do a little more work on second page explaining:
- why we ended up with the default we did, which combines a number of technologies into a platform:
- GNOME Desktop Environment
- Compiz (not actually a part of GNOME, but prominent in the UI)
- Firefox and other third party apps
- SELinux
- kernel
- Is this due to Red Hat as Fedora's main sponsor?
- In part, because Fedora is driven by contribution, and Red Hat as a Fedora contributor drives a massive amount of free software innovation done directly in the kernel, tools, security, desktop, and elsewhere, and then quickly inherited into Fedora where it can be distributed in consumable form
- R&D lab idea allows anyone to grow technology in Fedora
- But other pieces of the platform are "best of breed FOSS" but not due to Red Hat or Fedora necessarily, e.g. Firefox
- Not just about a desktop environment, but in the future need to give thought to how to design the whole system
- We need to give thought whenever components change; and we have more room available now (> CD size)
- why we ended up with the default we did, which combines a number of technologies into a platform:
- NEXT ACTIONS:
- Paul will do more drafting and post back to Board
Clarifying Issues Around Spins
- Owners: Matt & Colin
- Can Spins/SIGS or Fedora remixes define their own target audience?
- Can Spins/SIGS or Fedora remixes change the code enough to meet their goals?
- http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/spins/2010-February/000996.html
- Summary of what Matt has tracked down so far User:Mdomsch/SWG_Spins
- As part of the research for this this we tried to get a clearer picture of what the Spins SIG is responsibile for. We understand those responsibilities to be:
- Managing the approval process for new spins
- spins pages
- kickstart file is good
- Coordinating Board trademark approval
- Individual spin owners may not participate in the SIG, so will need to reach out to them directly.
- Spins pain points raised on this recent thread:
- http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/advisory-board/2010-February/007975.html and following for many messages. These are additional to the questions we asked of them
- We still want to make sure that the work of the Spins SIG is not blocked
- Fedora as a project may not be able to provide all necessary resources to every Spin
- Spins are a way for contributors to gather connected communities of contributors, create more awareness and contribution to Fedora
- Community building is primarily a problem of increasing people capacity, not simply working harder
- Build infrastructure capacity, storage space, etc. -- technical blockers are critical path items
- Enable easy processes (TM licensing/approvals, etc.) to help contributors without inducing mass chaos
- alternately, do allow mass chaos where appropriate (Fedora Remix)
- Make it easier for contributors to help anywhere they want -- lower barriers so that anyone can build the actual workforce in the Fedora Project
- NEXT STEPS:
- Matt to email each of the spin owners with the original questions posed to the Spins SIG
Next Meeting
- March 1, 2010 @ 3 PM EST
- Discussion topics:
- Follow-up to Matt and Colin's work on Spins