On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 10:53:49AM -0500, Simo Sorce wrote:
2. one group wants us to aim exclusively for the bleeding edge open
source developer market.
What I don't get, seriously, is why people in 2. can't use rawhide or
the latest updates-testing and instead pretend to inflict almost
On 09/03/10 05:05, Seth Vidal wrote:
On Mon, 8 Mar 2010, Jon Masters wrote:
Folks,
I will propose this to FESCo through their normal channels.
My proposal is that we create a Fedora User Survey and create a link
on the fp.o website with a few very simple questions. One of those
On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 6:05 AM, Seth Vidal skvi...@fedoraproject.orgwrote:
On Mon, 8 Mar 2010, Jon Masters wrote:
Folks,
I will propose this to FESCo through their normal channels.
-1
It sure looks like a californian referendum process. Let me make this
abundantly clear: I have
On 03/09/2010 06:20 PM, Ewan Mac Mahon wrote:
On Tue, Mar 09, 2010 at 05:55:33PM +, Terry Barnaby wrote:
On 09/03/10 16:50, Ewan Mac Mahon wrote:
On Tue, Mar 09, 2010 at 09:33:45AM -0500, Al Dunsmuir wrote:
I have limited time to do system installs and maintenance. Sticking
with one
On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 2:51 PM, Seth Vidal skvi...@fedoraproject.org wrote:
On Tue, 9 Mar 2010, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
Another question - how many broken things we shipped in release that could be
fixed by updates? We shipped lot of unfinished, feature incomplete stuff in
history...
On Wed, 10 Mar 2010, drago01 wrote:
On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 2:51 PM, Seth Vidal skvi...@fedoraproject.org wrote:
On Tue, 9 Mar 2010, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
Another question - how many broken things we shipped in release that could
be
fixed by updates? We shipped lot of unfinished,
On Wed, 10 Mar 2010 10:46:54 -0500 (EST)
Seth Vidal skvi...@fedoraproject.org wrote:
On Wed, 10 Mar 2010, drago01 wrote:
On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 2:51 PM, Seth Vidal
skvi...@fedoraproject.org wrote:
On Tue, 9 Mar 2010, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
Another question - how many broken
On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 10:53:49 -0500,
Simo Sorce sso...@redhat.com wrote:
What I don't get, seriously, is why people in 2. can't use rawhide or
the latest updates-testing and instead pretend to inflict almost
rawhide on everybody else.
Because updates-testing is really for testing not
On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 10:48 PM, Jon Masters jonat...@jonmasters.org wrote:
On Tue, 2010-03-09 at 17:30 -0500, Chris Ball wrote:
Now, there's a reasonable argument that says that Fedora users without
FAS accounts didn't vote for FESCo, so it's still legitimate to ask
*those* users what they
On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 10:48 PM, Jon Masters jonat...@jonmasters.org wrote:
On Tue, 2010-03-09 at 17:30 -0500, Chris Ball wrote:
Now, there's a reasonable argument that says that Fedora users without
FAS accounts didn't vote for FESCo, so it's still legitimate to ask
*those* users what they
On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 11:08 AM, Stephen John Smoogen smo...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 10:48 PM, Jon Masters jonat...@jonmasters.org wrote:
On Tue, 2010-03-09 at 17:30 -0500, Chris Ball wrote:
Now, there's a reasonable argument that says that Fedora users without
FAS accounts
On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 12:32 PM, Robyn Bergeron
robyn.berge...@gmail.com wrote:
That looks to be about 400 people need to randomly selected and
complete the survey (for +/- 5%). to get down to 1% you would need to
get 6500 people.
I don't think that the near-impossibility of having a
On 03/09/2010 05:45 AM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
On 03/09/2010 06:37 AM, Michael Cronenworth wrote:
Correct me if I am wrong, but right now the Fedora project knows little
to nothing about its user base as a whole from a scientific perspective.
And why does Fedora need to know about this?
On Tue, Mar 09, 2010 at 08:51:06AM -0500, Seth Vidal wrote:
1. One group wants us to aim for mom/pop/grandma/desktop users - the
apple market or what ubuntu aims for.
2. one group wants us to aim exclusively for the bleeding edge open
source developer market.
3. one group wants us to aim
On Tue, 9 Mar 2010, Matthew Miller wrote:
On Tue, Mar 09, 2010 at 08:51:06AM -0500, Seth Vidal wrote:
1. One group wants us to aim for mom/pop/grandma/desktop users - the
apple market or what ubuntu aims for.
2. one group wants us to aim exclusively for the bleeding edge open
source
On Tuesday 09 March 2010 06:05:32 Seth Vidal wrote:
On Mon, 8 Mar 2010, Jon Masters wrote:
Folks,
I will propose this to FESCo through their normal channels.
My proposal is that we create a Fedora User Survey and create a link
on the fp.o website with a few very simple questions.
On Tue, 9 Mar 2010, Matthias Clasen wrote:
On Tue, 2010-03-09 at 08:51 -0500, Seth Vidal wrote:
Here's the camps I see:
1. One group wants us to aim for mom/pop/grandma/desktop users - the
apple market or what ubuntu aims for.
2. one group wants us to aim exclusively for the bleeding
On Mon, 8 Mar 2010, Michael Cronenworth wrote:
On 03/08/2010 11:05 PM, Seth Vidal wrote:
-1
It sure looks like a californian referendum process. Let me make this
abundantly clear: I have ZERO interest in developing a distro which is
driven by mob vote of whomever happens to be on the
On Tue, 2010-03-09 at 08:51 -0500, Seth Vidal wrote:
We get the users we aim for.
Not really true. We don't aim at all, and we only get the users that can
bear to stay with us...
Here's the camps I see:
1. One group wants us to aim for mom/pop/grandma/desktop users - the
apple market or
On Tue, 9 Mar 2010, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
Another question - how many broken things we shipped in release that could be
fixed by updates? We shipped lot of unfinished, feature incomplete stuff in
history...
Nobody can't say I'm for shipping broken stuff - for release, updates etc...
I'm
Hello Seth,
Tuesday, March 9, 2010, 8:38:44 AM, you wrote:
On Tue, 9 Mar 2010, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
On Tuesday 09 March 2010 14:02:07 Seth Vidal wrote:
I'm sure with the same logic I can say a lot of things.
What I said was I want fewer broken things.
-sv
Seth,
The problem is that
On Tue, 9 Mar 2010, Al Dunsmuir wrote:
Seth,
The problem is that when things do get broken in a stable release, the
updates that fix the problem often only get released in the next
release.
When I installed F11, two of my systems ran fine for the install and
those updates
Hello Seth,
Tuesday, March 9, 2010, 9:37:26 AM, you wrote:
On Tue, 9 Mar 2010, Al Dunsmuir wrote:
Hello Seth,
Tuesday, March 9, 2010, 9:23:00 AM, you wrote:
Your primary server runs fedora? May I ask why?
-sv
I have limited time to do system installs and maintenance. Sticking
On Tue, 2010-03-09 at 12:23 +0100, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
Ok, but then we're stuck in infinite cycle. Some people want to change update
policies/target of Fedora because of users, we don't know who are our user
and
what they want. Now someone wants to know who are our users/what our users
Hello Seth,
Tuesday, March 9, 2010, 9:23:00 AM, you wrote:
Your primary server runs fedora? May I ask why?
-sv
I have limited time to do system installs and maintenance. Sticking
with one distribution helps keep that sane. I have a dual boot XP +
Ubuntu machine that I do some play with,
On Tue, 9 Mar 2010, Al Dunsmuir wrote:
Hello Seth,
Tuesday, March 9, 2010, 9:23:00 AM, you wrote:
Your primary server runs fedora? May I ask why?
-sv
I have limited time to do system installs and maintenance. Sticking
with one distribution helps keep that sane. I have a dual boot
On Tue, Mar 09, 2010 at 10:17:21AM -0500, Seth Vidal wrote:
Aiming at #1 means that every single new student and researcher at the
school where I work comes in asking for Ubuntu -- even if one could make a
very persuasive case that these users probably fit better into #2 and #3.
I think the
On Tuesday 09 March 2010 14:35:49 Dan Horák wrote:
Seth Vidal píše v Út 09. 03. 2010 v 08:02 -0500:
On Tue, 9 Mar 2010, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
Ok, but then we're stuck in infinite cycle. Some people want to change
update policies/target of Fedora because of users, we don't know who
are
On Tue, 9 Mar 2010, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
On Tuesday 09 March 2010 14:02:07 Seth Vidal wrote:
On Tue, 9 Mar 2010, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
Ok, but then we're stuck in infinite cycle. Some people want to change
update policies/target of Fedora because of users, we don't know who are
our user
On Tue, Mar 09, 2010 at 03:30:37PM +, Terry Barnaby wrote:
I personally thought the old 12 month RedHat Linux release cycle was about
right.
RHL was also on a 6 month release cycle.
--
Matt Domsch
Technology Strategist, Dell Office of the CTO
linux.dell.com www.dell.com/linux
--
devel
On Tuesday 09 March 2010 14:02:07 Seth Vidal wrote:
On Tue, 9 Mar 2010, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
Ok, but then we're stuck in infinite cycle. Some people want to change
update policies/target of Fedora because of users, we don't know who are
our user and what they want. Now someone wants to
Seth Vidal píše v Út 09. 03. 2010 v 08:02 -0500:
On Tue, 9 Mar 2010, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
Ok, but then we're stuck in infinite cycle. Some people want to change
update
policies/target of Fedora because of users, we don't know who are our user
and
what they want. Now someone
On Tue, Mar 09, 2010 at 10:17:01AM -0500, Konstantin Ryabitsev wrote:
4. one group who don't really care about distro wars but use Fedora
because this way they know what will be in RHEL/CentOS, which is what
they use for serious work on their servers.
I actually use RHEL on my servers because
On Tue, 9 Mar 2010 12:23:42 +0100, Jaroslav wrote:
Some people want to change update
policies/target of Fedora because of users,
Not sure this is true.
we don't know who are our user and
what they want.
Really? The users I see want stuff that works. Preferably, they want the
stuff to
On Tue, 9 Mar 2010, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
Ok, but then we're stuck in infinite cycle. Some people want to change update
policies/target of Fedora because of users, we don't know who are our user and
what they want. Now someone wants to know who are our users/what our users
really want, we
On Tuesday 09 March 2010 14:51:06 Seth Vidal wrote:
On Tue, 9 Mar 2010, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
Another question - how many broken things we shipped in release that
could be fixed by updates? We shipped lot of unfinished, feature
incomplete stuff in history...
Nobody can't say I'm for
On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 8:51 AM, Seth Vidal skvi...@fedoraproject.org wrote:
Here's the camps I see:
1. One group wants us to aim for mom/pop/grandma/desktop users - the
apple market or what ubuntu aims for.
2. one group wants us to aim exclusively for the bleeding edge open
source developer
On Tuesday 09 March 2010 15:57:05 Matthias Clasen wrote:
On Tue, 2010-03-09 at 08:51 -0500, Seth Vidal wrote:
We get the users we aim for.
Not really true. We don't aim at all, and we only get the users that can
bear to stay with us...
Here's the camps I see:
1. One group wants us
On 09/03/10 15:49, Matt Domsch wrote:
On Tue, Mar 09, 2010 at 03:30:37PM +, Terry Barnaby wrote:
I personally thought the old 12 month RedHat Linux release cycle was about
right.
RHL was also on a 6 month release cycle.
Shows how good my memory is :)
Mind you, even then, I only update my
On 09/03/10 15:26, Seth Vidal wrote:
On Tue, 9 Mar 2010, Konstantin Ryabitsev wrote:
On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 8:51 AM, Seth Vidalskvi...@fedoraproject.org wrote:
Here's the camps I see:
1. One group wants us to aim for mom/pop/grandma/desktop users - the
apple market or what ubuntu aims
On Tue, Mar 09, 2010 at 09:33:45AM -0500, Al Dunsmuir wrote:
Hello Seth,
Tuesday, March 9, 2010, 9:23:00 AM, you wrote:
Your primary server runs fedora? May I ask why?
-sv
I have limited time to do system installs and maintenance. Sticking
with one distribution helps keep that
Hello Ewan,
Tuesday, March 9, 2010, 11:50:21 AM, you wrote:
On Tue, Mar 09, 2010 at 09:33:45AM -0500, Al Dunsmuir wrote:
Hello Seth,
Tuesday, March 9, 2010, 9:23:00 AM, you wrote:
Your primary server runs fedora? May I ask why?
-sv
I have limited time to do system installs and
On Tue, 9 Mar 2010, Michael Cronenworth wrote:
Seth Vidal wrote:
you have been on websites that allow anonymous posting, right? You know
what happens to them?
Yes, anonymous polling is liking playing with fire. Let me throw this
out there -- for a *first* run -- you could only allow FAS
On 09/03/10 16:50, Ewan Mac Mahon wrote:
On Tue, Mar 09, 2010 at 09:33:45AM -0500, Al Dunsmuir wrote:
Hello Seth,
Tuesday, March 9, 2010, 9:23:00 AM, you wrote:
Your primary server runs fedora? May I ask why?
-sv
I have limited time to do system installs and maintenance. Sticking
with
Hello Ewan,
Tuesday, March 9, 2010, 12:41:26 PM, you wrote:
On Tue, Mar 09, 2010 at 12:07:20PM -0500, Al Dunsmuir wrote:
To some extent, I view my current contribution to Fedora as being
unreasonable and insisting that it be able to perform basic server
tasks reasonably for a
On Tue, Mar 09, 2010 at 05:55:33PM +, Terry Barnaby wrote:
On 09/03/10 16:50, Ewan Mac Mahon wrote:
On Tue, Mar 09, 2010 at 09:33:45AM -0500, Al Dunsmuir wrote:
I have limited time to do system installs and maintenance. Sticking
with one distribution helps keep that sane. I have
Hello Michael,
Tuesday, March 9, 2010, 1:23:59 PM, you wrote:
On Tue, 9 Mar 2010 13:08:48 -0500, Al wrote:
I want more updates. I want them to be more frequent, incremental and
each reasonably well tested. Trying to do too many changes at a time
not only leads to an increased likelihood
On Mon, 2010-03-08 at 23:57 -0500, Jon Masters wrote:
I will propose this to FESCo through their normal channels.
My proposal is that we create a Fedora User Survey and create a link
on the fp.o website with a few very simple questions. One of those
questions would be what users think about
On Tue, Mar 09, 2010 at 12:30:32 -0500,
Seth Vidal skvi...@fedoraproject.org wrote:
On Tue, 9 Mar 2010, Michael Cronenworth wrote:
Seth Vidal wrote:
you have been on websites that allow anonymous posting, right? You know
what happens to them?
Yes, anonymous polling is liking
On Tue, Mar 09, 2010 at 12:07:20 -0500,
Al Dunsmuir al.dunsm...@sympatico.ca wrote:
To some extent, I view my current contribution to Fedora as being
unreasonable and insisting that it be able to perform basic server
tasks reasonably for a small home system. If it can't do
Hi,
Yes, anonymous polling is liking playing with fire. Let me throw
this out there -- for a *first* run -- you could only allow FAS
accounts to take the survey. That would really narrow your
demographics to only contributors, which is what you wish to see.
If we're trying to
On Tue, 2010-03-09 at 17:30 -0500, Chris Ball wrote:
Now, there's a reasonable argument that says that Fedora users without
FAS accounts didn't vote for FESCo, so it's still legitimate to ask
*those* users what they think. The impossibility of reaching such a
group of users without
Folks,
I will propose this to FESCo through their normal channels.
My proposal is that we create a Fedora User Survey and create a link
on the fp.o website with a few very simple questions. One of those
questions would be what users think about the current update policy,
using plain (and as
On 03/08/2010 11:05 PM, Seth Vidal wrote:
-1
It sure looks like a californian referendum process. Let me make this
abundantly clear: I have ZERO interest in developing a distro which is
driven by mob vote of whomever happens to be on the internet.
Correct me if I am wrong, but right now
On 03/09/2010 06:37 AM, Michael Cronenworth wrote:
Correct me if I am wrong, but right now the Fedora project knows little
to nothing about its user base as a whole from a scientific perspective.
And why does Fedora need to know about this?
Fedora is what its contributors make it and what its
On 03/08/2010 11:45 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
And why does Fedora need to know about this?
Maybe for some GSoC ideas? I don't know. Has Fedora (or a project like
this) ever had such data before?
Fedora is what its contributors make it and what its government allows
its contributors to make
On 03/09/2010 06:51 AM, Michael Cronenworth wrote:
On 03/08/2010 11:45 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
And why does Fedora need to know about this?
Maybe for some GSoC ideas? I don't know. Has Fedora (or a project like
this) ever had such data before?
Fedora is what its contributors make it and
57 matches
Mail list logo
