On Sun, 24 Aug 2008 23:14:40 -0700 Craig White <craigwhite@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Sun, 2008-08-24 at 17:05 -0600, Frank Cox wrote: > > On Sun, 24 Aug 2008 16:05:11 -0700 > > Bruce Byfield <bbyfield@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > it's not really surprising that interests should conflict > > > occasionally -- or that, in these circumstances, that actions should be > > > based primarily on corporate needs. > > > > And it shouldn't be surprising that they are being called on it. > > > > > As for a "public ass-kicking," if you really want to do something > > > effective (as opposed to indulging in self-righteousness), I suggest you > > > contact Red Hat and Fedora officials directly, not merely vent in > > > forums. > > > > That's what the Fedora Board (or whatever its official name is) is for. > > > > They should be front-and-center right now handling the public ass-kicking on > > behalf of the community. > ---- > your perception doesn't match mine as I don't see any public > ass-kicking... Indeed. That may be part of the problem at the moment. Lack of official advocacy at the highest levels, for lack of a better description. > I see a few people speculating about what has occurred and > they are projecting their expectations but that doesn't make them > meaningful and in fact looks sloppy at this point. Jeff has been promoting the idea that this issue arose due to a "mis-communication". I see it more as a lack of communication. "Something bad happened, let's tell everyone the minimum that we think we can get away with" is not a community process. And that's the point. Fedora is not MS Windows. It's not even RHEL. So why is there an apparent expectation and acceptance of "Caesar shall decide what the plebians shall be told"? -- MELVILLE THEATRE ~ Melville Sask ~ http://www.melvilletheatre.com -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
