I'm a bit late to the party, but what I'd like most from Fedora (and by extension, Gnome / Systemd, ... devs) is something on the meta level.
This isn't meant to sound harsh, but I don't know how to say it. Please don't do the cascade of attention-deficient teenagers thing. Please take backwards compatibility seriously. And please give me a stable distribution.
Stable doesn't mean a years old Firefox. CentOS is not stable, it is stale. Stable can mean always going with the latest and greatest software. But it means I write a program now, and I can be sure it works 5 years later with no or minimal changes - and importantly, not looking fallen out-of-time! A frozen Gnome 3.24 is not stable, it is stale once development moves on. Gnome was stable in, say, ~2.14 - 2.28 (I'm just making the numbers up) - it was still receiving new features, widgets, themes. The same applies to Fedora as a whole.
If you have to ship multiple versions of libraries, then be it so. But even better would be to influcence the developers to avoid breaking changes. Take backwards compatibility religiously, like Microsoft. I know it is not easy, but that is what I'd really love to see (before e.g. three finger guestures).
There is a big overlap between Fedora developers, and Gnome/Glib/Systemd/Networkmanager/Wayland/... developers, so you are in a great position to do so.
All in all, I like do Fedora. As others have said, it is really polished, like Ubuntu used to be. I used to use Debian and Ubuntu, but when things started moving and breaking under me (and in order to get up to date things I couldn't just live on a ESR) I moved to Windows. Once the Wayland dust settles, I'm definitely looking to move back to Linux/Fedora again.
This isn't meant to sound harsh, but I don't know how to say it. Please don't do the cascade of attention-deficient teenagers thing. Please take backwards compatibility seriously. And please give me a stable distribution.
Stable doesn't mean a years old Firefox. CentOS is not stable, it is stale. Stable can mean always going with the latest and greatest software. But it means I write a program now, and I can be sure it works 5 years later with no or minimal changes - and importantly, not looking fallen out-of-time! A frozen Gnome 3.24 is not stable, it is stale once development moves on. Gnome was stable in, say, ~2.14 - 2.28 (I'm just making the numbers up) - it was still receiving new features, widgets, themes. The same applies to Fedora as a whole.
If you have to ship multiple versions of libraries, then be it so. But even better would be to influcence the developers to avoid breaking changes. Take backwards compatibility religiously, like Microsoft. I know it is not easy, but that is what I'd really love to see (before e.g. three finger guestures).
There is a big overlap between Fedora developers, and Gnome/Glib/Systemd/Networkmanager/Wayland/... developers, so you are in a great position to do so.
All in all, I like do Fedora. As others have said, it is really polished, like Ubuntu used to be. I used to use Debian and Ubuntu, but when things started moving and breaking under me (and in order to get up to date things I couldn't just live on a ESR) I moved to Windows. Once the Wayland dust settles, I'm definitely looking to move back to Linux/Fedora again.