Talk:Fedora (Linux distribution)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is part of the Linux WikiProject, a group of Wikipedians interested in improving the encyclopaedic coverage of articles relating to Linux, and who are involved in developing and proposing standards for their content, presentation and other aspects.
If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
|
| B | This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale. |
 |
Fedora (Linux distribution) was a good article candidate, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. Once the objections listed below are addressed, the article can be renominated. You may also seek a review of the decision if you feel there was a mistake.
Date of review: 2004-09-04 |
 |
To-do list for Fedora (Linux distribution): | edit · history · watch · refresh |
|---|---|---|
|
||
Contents |
[edit] Merge
This is the basic plan for the merge:
Step 1: Move as much of Fedora Core into Fedora (Linux distribution).
Step 2: Once step 1 is complete redirect Fedora Core to Fedora (Linux distribution) and update the fedora disambiguation.
--Lwarf 09:05, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
Seems like a good plan. Once Fedora 7 is released, the two articles that make the most sense to have are "Fedora Project" and "Fedora (Linux Distribution".
"Fedora Core" and "Fedora Extras" articles should both redirect to "Fedora (Linux Distribution)". --24.199.152.59 05:15, March 15, 2007
Ok i've merged the two artcials, now what needs to be improved? --Lwarf 08:32, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] GA Review
[edit] User:BillDeanCarter
Here are a few notable things I think are missing.
- There should be a section about the switch from Red Hat 9 to Fedora Core 1. The reasons for the discontinuation and the new project. All about the strict free software goals, wariness of projects like Mono, etc...
- Reviews of each of the distributions are available on the web, so you should quote them and point out the faults and acclaim each release received.
- You should look at the release notes, or an abridged version, and add more information to the sections for some of the Fedora Core releases.
- You should talk about the project manager of the project (Jeff Keating?)
- You should talk about Fedora's relation to Red Hat. There are Red Hat engineers working with this project, right?
- You should mention in more detail the small but notable controversy over how Fedora is in some ways Red Hat's testing grounds.
- The controversies on Novell splitting the MAC security system, but using their AppArmor.
- The Eric S. Raymond controversies are fun too.
- You should mention that committee or something where Novell, Red Hat, IBM, all pool their patents together to have a kind of IP protection.
- You should talk up Xen.
- You should talk up SELinux, and the engineers behind it. Dan Walsh, and others? Talk about how Dan has said that SELinux does not really work as a community project. It's a complex technology with deep hooks into the kernel. There are interesting points to be made here.
- Talk about the uber-security Fedora has. They have certain compiler flags that most distributions don't use. They do this and that. people really care about security, so this will be very important stuff to read.
- talk about the slow death of Fedora Legacy.
- talk about volunteers, their strengths here, their weaknesses there.
- I commend you for tackling this very interesting and difficult article. I would really look at the journey Fedora Core has had since it switched over from Red Hat 9, and now moving into the all encompassing Fedora of 2007. It would be very cool to see this very technical distribution written so that both laymen and enthusiasts can take away some understanding. Best of luck.-BillDeanCarter 10:35, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] User:fafnir665
Removed the section about the PS3 from the Distributions section since it was hardware that the fedora distribution runs on, and not actually about a fedora distribution. Make a seperate entry for just hardware maybe?
[edit] Failed GA
I see a lot of problems with this article. Firstly, almost all sections (specifically release history) are very short and stubby - providing very little in-depth information. The article lacks an overview of the features and functions of the OS and the release history and its subsections fail to give a concrete idea of how it evolved. Its genesis (from Red Hat) is poorly handled. It also lacks in references. Sorry, but I had to fail it. Good luck for the future. --soum (0_o) 19:21, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
