Fedora's AI Developer Desktop Initiative Blocked by Community Backlash (itsfoss.com) 3
The blog It's FOSS has an update on the Fedora AI Developer Desktop Initiative, a proposed platform for AI/machine learning workloads on Fedora. It's now been blocked "after two Fedora Council members retracted their earlier approval votes."
The initiative was proposed by Red Hat engineer Gordon Messmer, aiming to deliver an Atomic Desktop with accelerated AI workload support, covering developer tools, hardware enablement, and building a community around AI on Fedora... At the May 6 council meeting, the members unanimously voted to approve this new initiative. After which a short, lazy consensus window was left open until May 8 to accommodate absent members, after which the decision was to be ratified.
But that last bit never happened, as council member Justin Wheeler (Jflory7) was the first person to change their vote to -1... ["While I strongly support leveraging AI to establish Fedora as a leading platform, completely rearchitecting our kernel strategy is a massive structural shift. It requires explicit alignment with our legal and engineering stakeholders before we commit the project to this path."] Following that, fellow council member Miro HronÄok (churchyard) put in his -1, saying that he had originally assumed the proposal was purely additive and therefore uncontroversial. But seeing the community's response, he realized that he was mistaken about that. As an elected representative, he felt the need to reflect on this major proposal before signing it off.
Over 180 replies have piled up in the proposal's discussion thread, with many well-known Fedora contributors pushing back on things like kernel policy, proprietary software, and project identity. Hans de Goede from the packaging team called out the proposal's emphasis on CUDA support as going against Fedora's foundational commitment to free software, arguing that open alternatives like AMD's ROCm and Intel's oneAPI should be the focus instead.
But that last bit never happened, as council member Justin Wheeler (Jflory7) was the first person to change their vote to -1... ["While I strongly support leveraging AI to establish Fedora as a leading platform, completely rearchitecting our kernel strategy is a massive structural shift. It requires explicit alignment with our legal and engineering stakeholders before we commit the project to this path."] Following that, fellow council member Miro HronÄok (churchyard) put in his -1, saying that he had originally assumed the proposal was purely additive and therefore uncontroversial. But seeing the community's response, he realized that he was mistaken about that. As an elected representative, he felt the need to reflect on this major proposal before signing it off.
Over 180 replies have piled up in the proposal's discussion thread, with many well-known Fedora contributors pushing back on things like kernel policy, proprietary software, and project identity. Hans de Goede from the packaging team called out the proposal's emphasis on CUDA support as going against Fedora's foundational commitment to free software, arguing that open alternatives like AMD's ROCm and Intel's oneAPI should be the focus instead.
CUDA is an albatross (Score:2)
Re: CUDA is an albatross (Score:2)