On Fri, Jul 10, 2015 at 04:51:15PM +0100, Joe Brockmeier wrote:
provided elsewhere that let you do that already. Conversely, atomic is compelling _because_ of the Atomic platform. Atomic has novelty (for now), decent technical advantages, and a lot more marketing behind it.
Well, I mean... it's compelling for us because we want people to have Fedora available $all_the_places, right? So having only Atomic means we'd basically be saying if you want to do things in the cloud, either do them the "Atomic way" or use another project, right?
So, another option here is to twist an early decision we made by 90°. Switch from Cloud, Server, Workstation to Atomic, Server, and Workstation (sorry, branding/design team!). Atomic can run on bare metal, and we could start making Fedora Server cloud image and push those to Amazon, etc., and this could serve as the generic building-block cloud image people want. It'd probably be bigger, but that's okay because we'd know _why_. (And I hope with the improvements we're making on size in general, it wouldn't be too much bigger.)
On Fri, Jul 10, 2015 at 12:07 PM, Matthew Miller mattdm@fedoraproject.org wrote:
On Fri, Jul 10, 2015 at 04:51:15PM +0100, Joe Brockmeier wrote:
provided elsewhere that let you do that already. Conversely, atomic is compelling _because_ of the Atomic platform. Atomic has novelty (for now), decent technical advantages, and a lot more marketing behind it.
Well, I mean... it's compelling for us because we want people to have Fedora available $all_the_places, right? So having only Atomic means we'd basically be saying if you want to do things in the cloud, either do them the "Atomic way" or use another project, right?
So, another option here is to twist an early decision we made by 90°. Switch from Cloud, Server, Workstation to Atomic, Server, and Workstation (sorry, branding/design team!). Atomic can run on bare metal, and we could start making Fedora Server cloud image and push those to Amazon, etc., and this could serve as the generic building-block cloud image people want. It'd probably be bigger, but that's okay because we'd know _why_. (And I hope with the improvements we're making on size in general, it wouldn't be too much bigger.)
It sounds like "atomic" is more of a flavor than a product. There's a proposal on desktop@ for Atomic Workstation. Is the Server WG interested in an atomic variant as well?
On Mon, Jul 13, 2015 at 12:35:14PM -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
It sounds like "atomic" is more of a flavor than a product. There's a proposal on desktop@ for Atomic Workstation. Is the Server WG interested in an atomic variant as well?
I think that's "Atomic" Workstation, with "Atomic" in quotes - unless there's a lot of change in both projects, think it'd be more confusing than not to actually call it that.
server@lists.fedoraproject.org