Platform support policy proposal

There is a fair amount of confusion about the specific operating system platforms, platform versions, etc. that Chef Software, Inc. supports for its products. This RFC will clarify this by calling out the individual operating systems and their releases as explicitly supported or not.
Yeah, :+1:, we probably need Fedora support more than we need RHEL5 support.  Probably more likely to encounter admins at RHEL shops that use Fedora on their desktop (to stay more up-to-date) than we'd encounter sites that still can't get their admin's workstations off of RHEL5.

At the same time, though, I think there's another cost/benefit discussion that we've never had.  We can probably get some low cost distros that leverage the chef-client support matrix that we've already got to support but which don't necessarily also have the highest benefit.  I'd argue we ship those because it expands the matrix which should be viewed as being critical to our business.  I think we've been resistant to do that, however, because it expands the support matrix and it *may* turn into a PITA.  And we've been pretty terrible about being able to drop support for something once it has become painful (see ruby 1.8.7).  The lack of ability to make agile decisions about dropping support seem to tie into the lack of agility in deciding to adopt distro support -- and larger distro support leads directly to more customers in this business, so that seems like a critical flaw in decision making that needs to get fixed.