Jason Brown wrote:
> On 03/04/2011 08:42 AM, m.roth@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
>> robert mena wrote:
>>> Well, I am just telling that since there is no actual schedule, no
>>> plans to change the way things are handled (lack of communication,
treat this
>>> as personal project etc) the best way to simply forget about it.
>>>
>>> The solution is good now and will be good whenever it appears. So
>> <snip>
>> Actually, it strikes me that I *do* have a question: what are the main
>> problems in the build/release? Has RH deliberately obscured some part(s)
>> of its build process, or made prerequisites utterly dependent upon
>> specific versions of libraries - that is, more than y'all have had to
>> deal with before?
<snip>
> I saw this posted yesterday on h-online.com.
>
> http://www.h-online.com/open/news/item/Controversy-surrounds-Red-Hat-s-obfuscated-source-code-release-1200554.html
Don't know h-online, but that's *real* interesting, and explains a lot:
not us, but Them (Oracle). Having had my recent experience with Oracle
(which I posted here a month or so ago), I can understand why they don't
want to help them....
mark
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
