"JÃhann B. GuÃmundsson" pÃÅe v St 10. 11. 2010 v 19:20 +0000:
> On 11/10/2010 05:26 PM, Miloslav TrmaÄ wrote:
> > The majority of growth in Red Hat contributions is developers and QA
> > (AFAIK for a long time there was only one person working full-time on
> > Fedora QA, now the situation is much different);
>
> I dont know how much of a history lesson you are given at Red Hat when
> you sign up but I suggest you take of your QE glasses ( QE!=QA ) study
> the history between Red Hat and Fedoraunity even after they literally
> saved the official GA release
I'm really sorry - I meant "Red Hat employed-person" above; I only
wanted to highlight the increase in Red Hat contributions, it was
absolutely not my intention to belittle anybody else's.
> > paradoxically asking
> > Red Hat for more manpower in community organizing implicitly means that
> > Red Hat should have_more_ control of Fedora.
>
> Why?
Doing useful work implicitly gives that person influence in the
community - if nothing else, the power to do something specific or to
refrain from doing it, but also greater ability to influence the
opinions of other people. More Red Hat employed people doing this work
will thus give Red Hat interests more influence. Also, more Red Hat
people doing useful work makes it more likely they will get voted in the
various governing bodies.
> How much control would I get if I pour $1 $10 $100 $1000 $100000 $1000000?
Commensurate to the contribution, I suppose. I don't know what would
happen exactly, but does that really matter? I'd love to have that
problem.
Mirek
_______________________________________________
advisory-board mailing list
advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/advisory-board
