On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 05:22:47PM -0400, Remy DeCausemaker wrote:
I'm new here, so bear with me, but Fedora has been really been
making
the "Friends" foundation a focus of the latest release, by improving
our infrastructure and community. I realize this is not necessarily
the distro itself, but there are a few activities that come to mind:
- We deployed Bodhi2 (5 years in the making, huge performance increases, fine-grained
karma, and more...)
- D&I - Advisor search ongoing, and we've approved funding to hire two Outreachy
interns, helping with Hubs/dev portal & Community Operations (CommOps)
- Fedora Hubs has already had a successful intern (mrichards) pave the way for future
interns and contributors.
- Fedora-bootstrap is our latest project wide CSS and website theme, providing cohesion
to our web properties.
- Fedmenu is a glimpse into the widgetized future that comes with embeddable widgets via
Fedora Hubs
-
http://whatcanidoforfedora.org is like the Fedora Sorting Hat :)
- Fedora Magazine has hit milestone readership and publications (actual numbers TBD)
- Others that I am not thinking of at the moment
I know this list above includes things that we have shipped along
with things we have not yet shipped, but we've made mentionable
progress on a number of fronts. I dunno if these 'Community'
improvements are part of a release announcement or not, but they are
def worth mentioning somewhere (particularly the strides that have
been made in front-end, and in Rel-eng.)
Nice angle — I really like this. I had suggested (or, maybe I glommed
onto someone else's suggestion beacause I like the idea — I forget —
anyway, it was suggested) that Fedora development might benefit from a
"tick-tock" cycle, with one release focusing on process improvements,
and the next release focusing on OS features. People weren't, overall,
comfortable with putting Fedora into that model, I think mostly because
feature changes sometimes come faster than that, but also irregularly.
In any case, though I think this is clearly a "tick" release, with more
process and infrastructure improvements than big change within the
actual distribution.
On a similar note, at FUDCon Lawrence a few years ago, Tim Burke
suggested a "red/yellow/green" model for labeling how much scary change
a release contains. (As an alternative to having major/minor releases.)
I'm not a big fan of that, because I think we're mostly at the point
where even our scary releases are actually very solid and are "green"
in the absolute sense. But from that point of view, this is a "green"
release too. With our current marketing / press model, which relies on
splashy changes to generate talking points, this ironically means the
releases we'd like _most_ to get into the hands of users get less
attention.
So anyway, that's a long way of saying that, yeah, I like the general
idea. I'm not sure a list of technical infrastructure improvements will
play any better with the press than a list of software version bumps,
though. Open to ideas. :)
Is there a standard template for asking the WG's and Subprojects
for
their bulletpoints? Do we even need to do that, or do we just take
the beta notes, and then fancy them up a bit at this point?
Beta notes make a good starting point, but I'd say fancy them up _a
lot_. :)
--
Matthew Miller
<mattdm(a)fedoraproject.org>
Fedora Project Leader