User:Mdomsch/SWG Spins

Status

• 2010-02-22: Awaiting formal response from the Spins SIG. Must also ask each Spin owner separately, as they may not participate in the SIG.

• In the meantime, treating other feedback as informative.

Spins SIG meeting log: http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2010-02-15/fedora-meeting.2010-02-15-21.01.log.html

Spins Pain Points (from TTFH - advisory-board Feb 18-22)

These are pain points expressed in the thread.

1. Spins not well represented on the get.fedoraproject.org web page
   1. Mo proposed, at a minimum, replacing the blue boxes on the top right with links to spins.fp.o. Agreed by Darren VanBuren, Paul Frieds, and Adam Miller.
   2. Unclear who has the action item to do this. Website team?

1. Who does QA of the Spins? Spins feeling they aren't getting QA resources.

1. Where can spins be hosted? Spins have not felt that Fedora Infrastructure would host their content.
   1. mmcgrath offered alt.fp.o.

1. Discontent that the "Default Spin" (e.g. the Desktop spin) is not managed in a well-defined process.
2. Discontent that the "Default Spin" is not open for renegotiation from time to time (competition among spins to be the "default spin"; procedure to decide which is the "default spin")
3. Discontent on insufficient resources for Spins (or ambassadors, or the project) in point comparisons to others.
   1. we have limited dollars to spend, others have more or fewer dollars to spend - yet each decides how to spend them, not all alike.
4. Discontent that Spins aren't getting sufficient attention from marketing.

Specific questions

1. Feedback received from Kevin Fenzi, seeing no huge obstacles to Spins, and their setting their own target audience.
2. Feedback received from Bruno Wolff III, suggesting some package changes (e.g. to games) would help.
   1. This can be done through the package maintainers, escalating to FESCo.