[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: website mockups, what is fedora?

On 08/21/2009 10:57 AM, John Poelstra wrote:
> Rex Dieter said the following on 08/21/2009 07:04 AM Pacific Time:
>> OK, I get the idea behind all of this, really I do.  Much of it is
>> great, but let me share what's been nagging at the back of my mind for
>> some time.  It's just been hard to put into words, so I'll try my best
>> here.
>> Let's get back to the question: What is Fedora?
> The question of "What is Fedora" has still not adequately been answered
> for me.  Refocusing the download page is *part* of getting to answering
> the question, but I still do not believe we are as clear as we could be
> about what we *are* (present) and what we *want* to be (future).  I
> realize others believe that defining it too much will stifle the project.

Fedora is the community of people who are involved with Fedora.

>> I thought a general consensus was something akin to: a solid flexible
>> base distro technology that can be used for many different purposes
> I think this is a definition we have historically held to, but to me it
> is too vague and uninspiring.  It lacks focus.  It tries to be too many
> things to too many people.  It is a recipe for mediocrity, not
> excellence.  I am not saying it cannot be one part of what we are, but
> if that is the sole definition of what we are and what we want to be,
> then we are destined to be "good," but never "great."
> I want Fedora to be great.  I cannot think of a super successful project
> or company that has 'been all things to all people.' They are usually
> very good because they focus on a few things and work on doing those
> things very well.  Fedora still needs to be clearer about what things we
> want to do very well.  And when we pick those things they need to be
> things we can measure and evaluate--another behavior of very successful
> companies.  I realize Fedora is not a "company", but I think the
> principle still applies.

I agree with this on a certain level and disagree with it on another
level.  I think that the Fedora Project should concentrate on being
stellar at community building.  The Fedora Product(s) should include a
"solid flexible base distro for many different purposes" which may well
be good without being great.  On top of that one product, we can create
other products that should strive to be great and focus on one area.
But the project as a whole should be diverse and try to make the "solid
flexible base" something that everyone can build on top of.

>> Then, look at the new website mockups.
>> (perceived) Answer: Fedora is the fedora-desktop spin
> The website mockups are meant to address the requirements specified by
> the board and discussion on this list.
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Website_redesign_2009
> If the requirements are wrong, then that is separate discussion that we
> should have.  Does there need to be more discussion around the
> requirements?
Yes, I think so.  Many of the issues I've seen raised speak to the
requirements, not to the design.  Additionally, as mentioned before, the
goals of the redesign are not mentioned in that page, only the audience
that the page is meant to target.  For instance, there's a difference
between the goal of: "Get new but technical users to download Fedora"
and "Get new but technical users to fall in love with Fedora".  A more
complex set of upfront choices might even be more helpful for achieving
the second goal.


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]