Hello,
On Fri, Oct 11, 2013 at 4:20 AM, Kevin Kofler <kevin.kofler(a)chello.at> wrote:
But the current spins will become even more second-class citizens
than they
are right now, whereas 2 spins of dubious value to our real-world users
(Server and Cloud) get featured instead. (How many people will really use
those?) The "Workstation" (hidden GNOME) monoculture is also a completely
unchanged continuation of the "Desktop" (hidden GNOME) monoculture with just
a new name (a name which is all the sillier considering that most Fedora
users are home users).
No, the intent was very much to change what the resulting desktop
prioritizes. Quite a few FESCo members would be rather disappointed
if the new Workstation ended up just an unchanged GNOME[1].
The addition of 2 non-desktop spins is only a lame
attempt at papering over that GNOME monopoly.
No, we are not adding 2 new products and all that extra work just to
make GNOME look better. That would be an extreme amount of work to
tackle a PR issue, and it couldn't even work, as this thread shows.
The selection of the 3 "Products" makes the whole concept
of Products and
Working Groups worthless and counterproductive. The selection of Products
should have been based on the existing successful spins, and the Working
Groups formed from the existing SIGs.
The move to 3 products was intended to be a real change, not a
relabeling of the things we already do. The fact that we don't have a
successful server SIG/spin was seen as a problem that needs to be
fixed, not as a reason to continue avoiding server uses.
Mirek
[1] As opposed to any of 1) non-GNOME, 2) GNOME changed by Fedora, 3)
GNOME upstream changing. I don't know enough to say whether any of
these variants is generally preferred within FESCo.