What I'm seeing here is a failure for people to understand that this discussion is not turning out to be about Fedora's target audience, but infact a battle over those who don't realize that Fedora is intended to be an OSS Pure distro that does not include proprietary software(display drivers) which this <a href="http://X.org">X.org</a> update could potentially(definately) break end-user's machines. I think that this discussion is void. The fact of the matter is Fedora shouldn't have to worry about breaking software that RedHat/Fedora does not include at install. Why worry about those that like to toy with their systems anyway? They can chose not to install the update untill nVidia/ATI (AMD exscuse me) decide to release a compatible driver. It's no worse than doing kernel updates where you have to reinstall the driver anyway. --cjr <div>On 7/27/06, Sean <<a href="mailto:seanlkml@sympatico.ca">seanlkml@sympatico.ca</a>> wrote:<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"> On Thu, 27 Jul 2006 16:55:43 +0200 Hans de Goede <<a href="mailto:j.w.r.degoede@hhs.nl">j.w.r.degoede@hhs.nl</a>> wrote: > No, this was the proverbial drop of water that made the bucket flow over > (Dutch proverb). The thing I want to discuss is the general impression > that Fedora Developers (both RH and Community ones) are loosing sight of > end users and are doing things purely on their technical merits even if > this hurts the end users. This xorg update is but one example. The xorg update isn't an example of hurting end users. It's an example of putting better software in the hands of more users. That's the same reason that _any_ updates to FC5 happen. I'm not sure what other problems you're including in your accusation but they should be brought up so that they can be addressed. Remember though that even though there are many developers that are involved with Fedora it is mostly a packaging operation of the best that developers have to offer. The point being that many problems aren't best addressed by Fedora packagers but rather by the individual application developer communities. > Also I'm not alone in this, I've received private mail backing me, but > people are afraid to back me publicly because they have tried to discuss > this in the past and instead of having a healthy discussion they got flamed. It's a mistaken impression that we need to address for sure. People should be able to see that Fedora is intending to deliver the best open source software possible. > The name of that page describes perfectly what it is a list of > Objectives. A good list, which with I can fully agree, but it doesn't > properly define our target audience. The closest to a target audience > definition I can find on this page is: "built for and by a community" > > Which I find a rather narrow definition, so people who do not contribute > are not part of our target audience? Them I'm most definetly putting > large amounts of time into the wrong distro. I think that phrase was included to acknowledge that no distribution can be all things to all people. That Fedora will be built to meet the needs of the community that builds it. If it meets the needs of others then that's great. Sean -- fedora-devel-list mailing list <a href="mailto:fedora-devel-list@redhat.com">fedora-devel-list@redhat.com </a> <a href="https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list">https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list</a> </blockquote></div>