On 08/27/10 16:09, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
On Fri, Aug 27, 2010 at 2:47 PM, Bob Arendt<rda(a)rincon.com>
wrote:
> Actually I think Fedora *should* articulate who the users are, basically
> design and express who and what Fedora is designed for.
<snip>
> I think it would be much better for Fedora to decide what it *should* be,
> specifically what the Fedora userspace should be, and excel at that.
You have contradicted yourself a little bit here. And maybe its a
language barrier so I'll be explicit.
Who the users are now and who our users should be are not necessarily
the same group. Polling our current user-base doesn't necessarily help
us define who are users should be. And similarly polling our current
user-base doesn't necessarily help us identify what we need to do
better to better find and serve the users who should be using Fedora.
Nor does it necessarily help us focus on the needs on any particular
group that currently exists. We have some users who want A. We have
some users who want B. That's what a survey will tell us, it won't
help us judge the value of A relative to the value of B as a focus.
-jef
My first statement was poorly phrased. Fedora should state it's principles,
properties, use-cases, plant it's flag, and call for users that are
interested in these characteristics to rally around it. Fedora seems to do
this from time to time; My point is that it should continue to do this.
The real people who should decide that direction are the contributors - it's
where the project's strength and energy comes from. Developers, testers, etc.
Poll your contributors - polling the userbase adds noise. Fedora should
stick with it's Meritocratic roots.
.. of course, not being a significant contributor, I've disenfranchised
myself. But I'm still a strong Fedora follower and enjoy the distribution.
Cheers,
-Bob Arendt