On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 5:27 PM, Martin Langhoff
<[email protected]> wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 11:18 AM, Miloslav Trmač <[email protected]> wrote:
>> On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 3:38 PM, Matthew Miller
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> This is a draft of the proposal I'm presenting at Flock, "An Architecture
>>> for a More Agile Fedora" (<http://sched.co/19ugKGM>).
>> (The more high-level comment.)
>>
>> This essentially explicitly gives up on the idea of "Fedora" or,
>> implicitly, "Linux" as a "platform"^W/"deployment target"/"ecosystem"
>
> Quite the opposite, I would say.
>
> The BSDs show that you can maintain a highly integrated small core OS
> with a tiny team. Android has shown it can be done on top of the Linux
> kernel. The traditional Linux distros are comparatively flailing at it
> -- throwing a ton more resources at it, badly coordinated.
I mostly agree with this part.
> If Fedora moves to a tightly integrated core, and does it in a way
> that other distros follow, Linux could grow a small core that moves in
> sync with the kernel and outpaces the competition.
This proposal doesn't seem to make rings 0 or 1 particularly more
integrated - just smaller; and it places a higher barrier to entry to
adding useful functionality to the core.
Want to add new a JSON library, HTTPS library with OCSP support, DNS
resolver to the integrated core? Sorry, 30% of the stacks are on a
2-year lifecycle and can't use it now; other 30% have decided to ship
unmodified upstream code and will not integrate any Fedora
Core-specific patches.
Mirek
--
devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
