On Mon, Dec 9, 2013 at 4:01 PM, Christian Schaller <cschalle(a)redhat.com> wrote:
Ok, we are going in circles here. So lets be clear we all agree that
we need a system where the basics are working well. Ease of installation, robustness,
driver support and so on. The system can not be inherently broken. We all agree on that
point.
So the next question becomes, what is the point of the PRD? First of all it is not to
define what applications people can or can not package for the Fedora ecosystem. If
someone wants to package 'My little Pony click-along adventures' that is perfectly
fine no matter what usecases or targets we list in the PRD.
The point of the PRD is to give an overall set of priorities/goals for the development
effort around each product. Meaning where are we going to spend engineering time beyond
the basic 'make the system work smoothly'. So if you are going to make general
consumers a specific target we need to back that up with development plans for general
consumer, like writing new applications for smoother facebook usage or more educational
software for kids or whatever you decide the 'general consumer' wants. So while
there might be software in such categories which ends up getting packaged for Fedora, I
don't think there is anyone on this list who actually plans on writing such software
for Fedora specifically.
So as I stated before and which also the PRD stated, we do hope that the workstation
becomes a solid and nice desktop that a lot of people can like and want to use, because at
the end of the day all users, developer or others, want the same baseline, a stable and
well working system.
It seems like you and Matthew don't really disagree much on what we
should produce just whether we should add the general user to the PRD.
Given that we are going to cover this case anyway (because in the end
everyone is a "general user") ... how does adding it hurts us? It just
a clear statement that non developers are not excluded.