I would think so, just get it directly from there is what I'm thinking, and then people could swap out to alma/rocky/whatever and we don't have to choose the right or "wrong" one.
@j0rge Can I takeover the main-bootc repo? It's currently re-pushing the base fedora-bootc image, but I'd like to use it to start building bootc desktops
Ok, so 5 years of ublue lts? Since ublue distributes end-user images, I don't think the ability to switch to a different EL clone base will matter. The main distinction is between EL-next and EL
You're invited to talk on Matrix. If you don't already have a client this link will help you pick one, and join the conversation. If you already have one, this link will help you join the conversation
@imbev a longer support desktop from the Fedora world would be crazy to see. Would be interested to see what the balance looks like between new packages and the stability from staying on something old.
Shame that it didn't stay on CentOS Stream because it would have been awesome for those guys to have a downstream example that they would like to play with, but Alma's great too. And Alma is a downstream as well.
On the topic of bootc, I reached out this week to help them start figuring our how they want to market and position bootc and the bootc images. We'll see where they land but it's exciting. Lots of openness to the idea of bootc being an invitation for the community to build something with it.
What I would like to see is Fedora pick up more of the cloud native methodology that uBlue has if they don't already. But I know @Noel is looking at how that can work.
Maybe it would be valuable to point folks from the atomic downstream community into the Fedora Atomic Desktops SIG specifically. Besides getting bootc over the line, I imagine that SIG is the next thing that is the most consequential for all of the atomic desktop downstreams. And I think Timothee would be grateful for the help.