On 10 April 2014 09:34, Matthew Miller <mattdm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
-- On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 11:17:16AM -0400, Eric H. Christensen wrote:So, from the three issues that I identified in the board ticket
> That's great that these companies contribute to FOSS projects. I'm less
> likely to complain about services that are developed as FOSS that they are
> commericalizing. Making it easier for our users to start using their
> closed projects, however, is not okay. It does not forward our cause for
> FOSS. Otherwise we could lump Microsoft into that group since they have
> made contributions to FOSS projects (including the kernel) in the past.
(presentation of proprietary web services as applications, curation of the
list of services, applications interacting with proprietary services in
general), it seems like you are really more interested in the _second_ part:
the selection and curation of the list. Not _necessarily_ whether the
website code (either frontend or backend) is free / open source, although
you consider that an important factor.
>From the peanut gallery, my main concern is selection and curation. Let us say that we throw the "do these programs represent Fedora values" out the window as being old fashioned or just too hard to judge. Who gets to decide which is on this list and what criteria is being used. Do we add stuff when people ask, do we remove stuff when people ask? How do we deal with the millions of SaaS out there that will want to be part of this (only if it is because if their rival down the street is listed they want in too). When we find out that many of our users are wanting Microsoft or Apple products listed... do we? and why not?
Stephen J Smoogen.
_______________________________________________ advisory-board mailing list advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/advisory-board
