Matthew Garrett: Re: Default offerings, target audiences, and the future of Fedora
Eric (a fellow Fedora board member) has a post describing his vision for what Fedora as an end goal should look like. It's essentially an assertion that since we have no idea who our users are or what they want, we should offer them everything on an equal footing.Shockingly enough, I disagree.
At the most basic level, the output of different Special Interest Groups is not all equal. We've had issues over the past few releases where various spins have shipped in a broken state, because the SIG responsible for producing them doesn't have the resources to actually test them. We're potentially going to end up shipping F20 with old Bluetooth code because the smaller desktops aren't able to port to the new API in time[1]. Promoting these equally implies that they're equal, and doing so when we know it isn't the case is a disservice to our users.
But it's not just about our users. Before I joined the Fedora project, I'd worked on both Debian and Ubuntu. Debian is broadly similar to the current state of Fedora - no strong idea about what is actually being produced, and a desire among many developers to cater to every user's requirements. Ubuntu's pretty much the direct opposite, with a strongly defined goal and a willingness to sacrifice some use cases in order to achieve that goal.
This leads to an interestingly different social dynamic. Ubuntu contributors know what they're working on. If a change furthers the well-defined aim of the project, that change happens. Moving from Ubuntu to Fedora was a shock to me - there were several rough edges in Fedora that simply couldn't be smoothed out because fixing them for one use case would compromise another use case, and nobody could decide which was more important[2]. It's basically unthinkable that such a situation could arise in Ubuntu, not just because there was a self appointed dictator but because there was an explicit goal and people could prioritise based on that[3].
Bluntly, if you have a well-defined goal, people are more likely to either work towards that goal or go and do something else. If you don't, people will just do whatever they want. The risk of defining that goal is that you'll lose some of your existing contributors, but the benefit is that the existing contributors will be more likely to work together rather than heading off in several different directions.
But perhaps more importantly, having a goal can attract people. Ubuntu's Bug #1 was a solid statement of intent. Being freer than Microsoft wasn't enough. Ubuntu had to be better than Microsoft products on every axis, and joining Ubuntu meant that you were going to be part of that. Now it's been closed and Ubuntu's wandered off into convergence land, and signing up to spend your free time on producing something to help someone sell phones is much less compelling than doing it to produce a product you can give to your friends.
Fedora should be the obvious replacement, but it's not because it's unclear to a casual observer what Fedora actually is. The website proudly leads with a description of Fedora as a fast, stable and powerful operating system, but it's obvious that many of the community don't think of Fedora that way - instead it's a playground to produce a range of niche derivatives, with little consideration as to whether contributing to Fedora in that way benefits the project as a whole. Codifying that would actively harm our ability to produce a compelling product, and in turn reduce our ability to attract new contributors even further.
Which is why I think the current proposal to produce three first-class products is exciting. Offering several different desktops on the download page is confusing. Offering distinct desktop, server and cloud products isn't. It makes it clear to our users what we care about, and in turn that makes it easier for users to be excited about contributing to Fedora. Let's not make the mistake of trying to be all things to all people.
[1] Although clearly in this case the absence of a stable ABI in BlueZ despite it having had a dbus interface for the best part of a decade is a pretty fundamental problem.
[2] See the multi-year argument over default firewall rules and the resulting lack of working SMB browsing or mDNS resolving
[3] To be fair, one of the reasons I was happy to jump ship was because of the increasingly autocratic way Ubuntu was being run. By the end of my involvement, significant technical decisions were being made in internal IRC channels - despite being on the project's Technical Board, I had no idea how or why some significant technical changes were being made. I don't think this is a fundamental outcome of having a well-defined goal, though. A goal defined by the community (or their elected representatives) should function just as well.
Very long post ahead (sorry for the wall of text), part of a series of posts on some sysadmin topics, see
As I slowly read my good friends wishing each other a good trip, telling they got home safely, and the IRC channels form thick drops of a bitter-sweet etheral substance, I cannot help feeling DebConf13 is over For me as well, from the distance. Many friends gave me warm greetings, and without being there, gave me that beautiful feeling of real community that Debian has given me for ten years already, since I met in real-life many of its developers at DebConf3 in Oslo. And yes, I have stated this far too many times I have attended every DebConf since (and worked organizing most of them). This year,
As of today, thanks to the tremendous work of the French localization
team in Debian,
Due to the extremely r
RichiH used flint and steel to light the bonfire. We carefully fed it up
from those sparks to a blaze. Put on the biggest logs we could find
to make it last. Now I'm sitting on the hill above it watching folks
gathered around. A poem is being read, in Hindi, then
translated for us to English. Others have shared songs and poems in a dozen
languages, both classics and their own. Out below the darkness of
the lake. This is Debian at 20.
At the start of this DebConf, I gave a talk on
"
A new minor release 3.910.0 of

This blog post is a little recipe to do a Debian migration for a node using Puppet and some other good practices.
We do all the following commands as root, which on of the exceptional situation where you should have a real root session (login through console, or su -).
I tend to avoid using the X server while doing an upgrade, so my 'best' setup is to have a laptop to take note and check things on the internet and a session to the computer to upgrade (ssh + su - or login as root into console). In both case, I use screen during the upgrade so that I can handle disconnection.
Create or update your admin-syscheck script
First of all, a good practice is to have a script that runs various test on the system that checks everything is ok. This is not only for upgrade but in general. But in the case of upgrade, it can be particularly useful. I call this script admin-syscheck. This is a simple bash script.
This script check various aspect of the system and serve me as my external worker to check the most advanced knowledge I have gathered about setting up a service. For example, I know that having *.bak or *.dpkg-dist in /etc/ means that something needs to be merged and a file should be deleted. Another example is about setting up the right alias for
[no pictures here, just a short report].
Today DebConf, this year's edition of the annual Debian developer
conference, started with two inspiring talks about Debian proper, one by
Lucas Nussbaum, the other by Joey Hess.
This also means that yesterday DebCamp ended, the period preceeding
DebConf and dedicated to working on Debian together with others.
Here's a short report from my point of view:
I arrived here on Tuesday, the first day of DebCamp. I immediately fell
in love with the venue, & despite the early stage of setup, everything I
needed was working fine for me from the very start.
Like in previous years, I used the time to do work in the Debian Perl
Group, especially taking advantage of the presence of other team members.
That's the great thing about DebCamp & DebConf: collaborating in
real-life & real-time, from quickly asking a question over sitting
together to think about solutions for a problem to "just" chatting &
thereby developping ideas for the future.
In the previous days I
This is the first DebConf I miss in ten years, so... Yes, it's a big bummer for me. I'm not attending because this year, DebC(amp onf) coincide with the two first weeks of classes at my university And as a new teacher, I cannot afford to miss it!
Anyway, but that should not stand in the way to attend a nice Debian 20th anniversary party!
Parties will be held 