Slashdot Mirror
Robyn Bergeron Stepping Down As Fedora Project Leader
darthcamaro writes: "Red Hat's Fedora Linux Project Leader, Robyn Bergeron, has announced that she is leaving her role. Bergeron became Fedora Project Leader in February of 2012 and has presided over one of the busiest periods for Fedora ever. Fedora is now moving to a new model for Fedora 21, with separate desktop, cloud and server products. 'The community has now gotten to the point where it's not a one-size-fits-all product anymore,' Bergeron said."
"If we're going to be able to do three products just as well as we do one currently, without our tripling our QA [quality assurance] or release engineering workforce, we really have to figure out how to automate more stuff," Bergeron said
Does RedHat plan on hiring that many people, or is that why she is leaving?
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
Dude looks like a lady!
"If we're going to be able to do three products . . ."
Three products? Why not five?
There've been both desktop and server users of Fedora for ten years. Giving them separate install images instead of making them choose differently from a single installer is not going to hurt anything, and might make testing and deployment very slightly simpler.
This space intentionally left blank
There are quite a lot of web hosting companies which use Fedora out there.
This space intentionally left blank
Fedora makes sense for a computer geek's desktop, if that geek wants to play with the cutting edge. For web hosting, not so much. Centos makes more sense if you want it to just work, and keep working. Consider the support lifetime for Fedora.
Some people DO use Fedora on a web server. Since people write software in PHP 4 too - that doesn't mean it's a good idea.
Correction: there are quite a lot of web hosting companies which will lease you a physical host or VM with Fedora installed on it. Attempting to run any sort of serious production infrastructure on a distribution with an extremely short support life cycle is usually a bad idea.
(philip.paradis posting AC from this workstation, as I don't log in on it)
Since the i* think it's sound to:
1) enable sshd
2) let sshd listen to traffic from everywhere
3) allow root logins over ssh
4) (using password)
by default I think this is a good change.
Now where that should still remain the default? ..
Hopefully definitely not on desktop at least. But who knows?
The absurd release frequency, the unnecessary changes, and the bad quality forced me to air-gap my system and freeze it in an ancient version in order to keep it running (or, better said, in order to reduce the risk of it breaking down). I stopped recommending fedora ages ago. Now that that system fulfilled its original purpose, it will be repurposed and updated with something different, probably CentOS or Mint.
I think you're rather missing the point of Fedora. The whole point is a Free, rapid release cycle distribution to track the (b)leading edge technologies. The good stuff that drops out of this goes into RHEL a few years later, whilst the bad stuff is abandoned. If you wanted a long-term-support distro, why did you choose a rapid release cycle one in the first place? RHEL, CentOS or Scientific Linux are much more sensible if your're not interested in the latest features; but you can't have both - you can't have the latest stuff that was only developed last month unless you go with a rapid release cycle distro.
http://blog.nexusuk.org
Lol, fedora as a server
Fedora is the proving ground for just about all the stuff that may someday find its way into RHEL servers.
However, the process of getting from one to the other involves considerably delay, so some people will run Fedora as a server. It's not as stable, and doesn't get the maintenance lifespan, but that's the trade-off if you have to have the bleeding-edge stuff.
I did something similar purely for laziness reasons. My laptop was on FC16 until a couple of weeks ago (because it did everything I needed it to). The online update facility was long-gone, and I had to really search to find the FC17 install media, but once found, upgraded to a very broken FC17 quite quickly. I got it working by manually setting up a wired network connection and running "yum update" which fixed everything. From then on, 'fedup' took me through 18, 19 and onto 20 in a matter of hours.
I agree the release frequency is fast - that's sort of the point though. As time's gone on though, updating the entire OS has got easier and easier. 'fedup' makes it so easy it's not much different from doing the usual package updates. However, "leaving it until later" makes the job quite a bit harder, so I wouldn't recommend it.
At werk we use Redhat Enterprise, and my previous employer used Centos. I like both, but getting vaguely up to date versions of some stuff is really tedious. In many cases we end up compiling our own versions of things because that way we get the versions we want without needing to 'pollute' our systems with umpteen packages from $random_repo on the Internet. Probably not so much a concern for a home PC, but it's all part of the trade-off between stability and update frequency.
CentOS sucks balls. Very little online support.
was she eleven feet tall with the hands of a lumberjack?
It is what it is.
There've been both desktop and server users of Fedora for ten years. Giving them separate install images instead of making them choose differently from a single installer is not going to hurt anything, and might make testing and deployment very slightly simpler.
Might also allow for different release cycles, too, particularly desktop. It's conceivable that server would be the stable core but as new desktop and application updates are released, they could be packaged and released without disturbing the core. Some Ubuntu derivatives do that, using the LTS as a base and then updating the desktop and apps for in between releases until the next LTS.
Certainly, if you want to develop next year's version of your software on next year's version of RHEL, Fedora is appropriate. I even deployed Fedora to production once when the application absolutely had to have a new subsystem that wasn't yet available in CentOS (not without compiling and replacing a bunch of stuff).
Okay, so actually I'v done it more than once. First I did it not knowing any better, than when that bit me I did it one more time when I didn't have much choice.
Er...no and no? That wasn't a question about her reason for leaving, it was just a general question about Fedora's future.
It's not just about the install image, it's actually about building useful stuff into each product (and also allowing the same things to be configured in different ways in the different products, which is another part of why they can't just be package sets). For instance, the 'role' management for Server: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki... .
Doe this mean he's hanging up his hat?
Unstable?? My Fedora 20 install with KDE have been rock solid and even pulse audio is working nice. And having a per-program audio volume is nice :}