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

Re: FESCo Meeting Minutes for 2006-09-7



On Fri, 08 Sep 2006 12:25:14 -0700, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:

> 12:20 < thl> but no one came up with a really good name yet
> 12:20 < z00dax> the only issue I have with the Fedora brand is that
> there is way too much association with the Fedora distro 
> 12:20 < thl> and FEdora implies == unsuspported by red hat
> 12:20 -!- mebrown_laptop [n=michael_] has joined #fedora-extras
> 12:21 < thl> that a nice side effect, but has other drawbaclks
> 12:21 < z00dax> and thats the one thing that Redhat go out of their way
> to point out that RHEL is not
> 12:21 < cweyl> thl: what do you mean by "loose the fedora brand"...
> start calling extras as a whole different?
> 12:21 < warren> what's wrong with "Enterprise Extras"?
> 12:21 < thl> cweyl, no, only for the Enterprise Extras stuff (e.g.
> Extras for RHEL)

If there's one thing I don't like about the name "Enterprise Extras" it's
that it suggests too much about the _type of software_ that is offered,
instead of the target distribution the software is built for. It is too
generic a name.

"Enterprise" simply is not the name of a distribution and not the name of
a project either. It suggests that it's extra software specifically for
enterprise-level target groups, which is strange when that's only because
Fedora packages are built for just another distribution.

"Fedora Extras" is neutral in that it's extra packages from the Fedora
Project and doesn't say anything about what type of software it might be,
as Fedora is also the base name of the distribution.


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