On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 3:12 PM, James B. Byrne<byrnejb@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Nonetheless, it is very evident from the heated exchanges on this
> mailing list that there exists a substantial divergence on which
> path to take from here. It seems to me insupportable that the past
> practices of a small coterie of initiates deciding on everything
> without community input will suffice for the future. If that does
> become the choice taken then I foresee the community splitting in
> the future in consequence.
I think your conclusions are wrong. I don't think there is
"substantial divergence" in the CentOS community, and I don't think
the project is in danger of forking. I also think that if you open up
the core development to "community input" you'll have endless
discussion, and a degraded product (the "when all is said and done, a
lot more will be said then done" principle). Again, what does
community input have to do with the mechanical process of turning
"upstream" code into a 100% binary compatible distribution?
--
RonB -- Using CentOS 5.3
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
