On Tue, 2006-08-08 at 12:17 -0500, Josh Boyer wrote: > 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. And mine! Greg, do you accept PayPal? M _______________________________________________ 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
