On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 04:45:10PM -0400, Máirín Duffy wrote:
> Just want to note that the user-facing edition offerings do not have
> to reflect the SIG structure should a change happen.
Good point. I hope we'd continue with Workstation, Server, and the
planned Fedora Atomic/OpenShift cluster edi
On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 01:56:20PM -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
> How about combine Cloud and Server WGs into a new WG with three new
> sub groups: hardware, cloud, atomic?
Interesting idea worth exploring.
When we started with this, the thinking was that Server would be more
for "pet" style system
On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 12:56 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
> Couldn't make the Cloud meeting but just skimmed the log;
> cross-posting to server@ list.
>
> How about combine Cloud and Server WGs into a new WG with three new sub
> groups:
> hardware, cloud, atomic?
>
> That way you get the benefit of o
Couldn't make the Cloud meeting but just skimmed the log;
cross-posting to server@ list.
How about combine Cloud and Server WGs into a new WG with three new sub groups:
hardware, cloud, atomic?
That way you get the benefit of one WG working on the big picture
stuff that enables integration among
