Bruno Wolff III wrote:
On Sun, Aug 24, 2008 at 22:09:09 +0200,
Anders Karlsson <anders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
You do not need to understand, you just need to accept that this is
the case.
In theory at least, Fedora is an open project and we don't have to just
accept the status quo. If it isn't actually an open project then it would
be nice to know that to as accurate information will help people make
better decisions on whether or not to participate in the project.
I think that's reasonable. This is a standard I hold myself at and even
my manager to (which I think he appreciates). I can go along with
something I don't agree with, but I want to at least know that there is
a legitimate reason for the action. In a situation that relies on
"volunteers" from the "community", even if it's headed up by a
corporation, that expectation is 10 times as valid, because there's no
money involved to make it easier to stomach.
In other words: Keep it close to the chest and alienate the community,
or be open and make the community happy. It's RedHat's choice to make,
but it's not one to be made likely and not one to be made without due
consideration of the costs involved - and for either choice, there
*will* be costs.
I think (and it's just my opinion) that most here would simmer down and
be content if they were at least sure that RedHat had taken the
community into consideration and that there were valid concerns that
trumped that. Considering that there are people in the community who
put a lot of time and effort into maintaining Fedora, that is, in my
mind, an eminently reasonable position.
--Russell
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
