Let's get moving

[Matt Nuzum]

On Thu, 2 Sep 2004 08:59:39 -0500, Matt Dickinson <lists at alpha345.com> wrote:
> lludwig-maillist at empoweringmedia.com wrote:
> > I agree, I more than happy to help but it seems like no one is really
> > steering the ship.
> 
> I've got time to spend, and I'm sure I'd be able to do some of the jobs
> required, I just don't know _exactly_ where to get started in the most
> efficient manner.
> 
> Matt
> 
> 

Sorry if this sounds a bit like a rant, it's really not.  It strikes
me that FLP is a short-term project to help people transition into one
of the more long-term linux solutions.

RedHat has split their product into two, one for those who like to
live on the edge, and another who like to maintain stability for long
periods of time.  So likewise, the RH/FC community is made up of 2 or
3 groups of people.

For those people who really can't afford to make big changes every
year and are still running RH 7, 8, and 9 (like me), we need to
transition to a commercially supported distribution.

For those who like to be on the edge and use FC, FLP is of no use and
they probably don't subscribe to this list.

There is one other group of people; those who want a free OS but
didn't realize the extent of what RH said when FC was released as an
unsupported, rapidly changing distribution.  I was shocked to see FC1
retired so soon.  People in this group need to come to the realization
that they need to choose a new distribution, either RHEL for
stability, FC for new features and RH familiarity, or another
distribution entirely.

I suggest that FLP create time-lines for which people can expect
support.  RH 7.x (x>=1) came out in 2001, right?  How long does the
community want to support it?

I've found that people often hesitate to volunteer for a project when
there is no end in sight.  They feel like they will be chained to it
for the rest of their life.  I think if we said, (for example) RH 7.x
support extended through FLP until Dec. 31 2005 and (again for
example) RH 8,9 support extended through Dec 31 2006 it would help
people feel more confident about volunteering (cause there's an end
date) and it would help people like me to finally kick it in gear and
make a decission about what to do. We could put a "project ownership"
schedule up so people could commit to doing an aspect of the
maintenance work for a set amount of time.  This is how we would
determine the time frame of support for a product.

I personally do not advocate that FLP support FC > 1.  I think a lot
of people bought into FC thinking it was the next generation of RHL. 
By now they need to realize it's a whole new beast and they need to
make a decission if that's what they really want.

BTW, I would like to see TAO, WhiteBox and CentOS merge into one and
pool their resources.  Unless I see a stronger community arise I will
consider these to be less supported even than FC.

Just some food for thought,
-- 
Matthew Nuzum | Makers of "Elite Content Management System"
www.followers.net | View samples of Elite CMS in action
matt at followers.net | http://www.followers.net/portfolio/