#69 [talk] RHEL, Fedora and CentOS: Solving The Penrose Triangle
Closed: Talk Scheduled 2 years ago Opened 2 years ago by blc.

What is your proposal?
The relationship between Fedora, RHEL, and CentOS is anything but obvious. Over time the interests of each distro and its patrons have grown and shifted, often filling in gaps and creating opportunities. Join us to hear how Red Hat and RHEL have evolved, why Fedora and CentOS are treasured, and how they fit together. From there we will discuss the road ahead, the problems Red Hat is working on, and the opportunities to work on them together.

Who needs to be in the room for this to succeed?
All attendees

Is this a …
Talk of 60 minutes

Who are you?
Name: Brendan Conoboy
FAS: blc
IRC: bconoboy
Name: Josh Boyer
FAS: jwboyer


@blc @jwboyer The CfP committee is in favor of this talk, however they would like to see the title made less vague. This seems to be the next version of the "What Does Red Hat Want?" talk. You aren't required to use that name, however something less vague is needed.

Metadata Update from @bex:
- Issue tagged with: Talk In Consideration

2 years ago

@bex Sure, we can update the title to something more descriptive. @jwboyer is on vacation this week- can it wait until he gets back?

@bex Sure, we can update the title to something more descriptive. @jwboyer is on vacation this week- can it wait until he gets back?

yes

I kind of object to classifying this as a "What does Red Hat Want" iteration. I can see how that would be, but I think this is a different discussion to be had.

As for titles, how about

"All in the Family: Problems our distros face and how each offers unique strengths to solve them."
"E Pluribus Unum: Fedora, Centos, and Red Hat working together to build a better ecosystem"
"Three's not a crowd: How each distro can work together to solve problems all face"
"This is not a What Red Hat Wants Talk"
"Percolator: Timing and balance makes good coffee"
"Titles for talks are stupid and so is this one"
"The Brendan and Josh show: They will agree and disagree all at the same time"

I kind of object to classifying this as a "What does Red Hat Want" iteration. I can see how that would be, but I think this is a different discussion to be had.

Can you modify the abstract to reflect that? I think the CfP committee was picking up on this part, "discuss what some of the problems are and some ideas on how Red Hat would like to improve."

Okay @bex we've updated the title and I've revised the abstract to make it align better with our draft presentation.

Metadata Update from @bex:
- Issue untagged with: Talk In Consideration
- Issue tagged with: Talk Accepted

2 years ago

Metadata Update from @bex:
- Issue close_status updated to: Talk Scheduled
- Issue status updated to: Closed (was: Open)

2 years ago

Login to comment on this ticket.

Metadata