Re: JBJ considered harmfull

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Tue, 2006-08-08 at 13:10 -0400, Greg DeKoenigsberg wrote:
> 
> Here are the questions that we *must* answer.  If internal engineering at 
> Red Hat is not willing to answer them, then the august body that is the 
> Fedora Board must at least take a position.
> 
> 1. Who is the upstream provider of RPM?  Is it rpm.org?  jbj?  Red Hat?  
> Fedora?
> 
> 2. If we are not the upstream of RPM -- and I'd argue we're not -- is it 
> our intention to reunite with the RPM codebase at some point in the 
> future, or not?
> 
> 3. If we are not going to rejoin with upstream RPM -- and I'd argue we're
> not -- then we have, in fact, forked RPM.  Therefore, what's the name of
> the new project, who is the upstream (Red Hat? Fedora?) and how do we act
> as an effective upstream for this project?
> 
> We will continue to deal with these unpleasant issues until we have the 
> courage to resolve them.
> 
> Again, just my $0.02.

Gets my $0.02 as well.

josh

_______________________________________________
fedora-advisory-board mailing list
fedora-advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxx
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board

_______________________________________________
fedora-advisory-board-readonly mailing list
fedora-advisory-board-readonly@xxxxxxxxxx
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board-readonly

[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Users]     [Fedora Outreach]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora KDE]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Yosemite Forum]     [Linux Audio Users]

  Powered by Linux