On 08/28/2010 05:31 PM, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 28, 2010 at 17:16:12 +0000,
> "\"Jóhann B. Guðmundsson\""<johannbg@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> It's not far from reality that Red Hat will get bought by a company
>> like Oracle so what's preventing us to get the same treatment as
>> OpenSolaris got?
>>
>> What happens to all the work the community has done, the fruits of
>> our labour?
> The code being distributed and needed for the build system are available.
> Removing the trademarked pieces are easy.
>
> So the project would need to change it's name, get new hardware and network
> service and hope enough community members continued to work on it and that
> there weren't ogranization issues caused by Redhat employees in leadership
> positions being lost.
For every leadership position that a corporate employee has there needs
to be a equal community member that shares that same role with him.
>
>> The first mistake we did was trying to label end user since it's not
>> up to the project in whole to decide which end user type it's
>> target.
> I disagree. I think the project is the entity that needs to determine this.
Unfortunate this has the side effect off taking side of one part of the
community over the other ( and the problem that comes with that ) and
usually people that are asked in cases like these are not the once
directly affected by the outcome of that decision.
>> It's should be up to individual community SIG's to decide what user
>> base they are targeting and the form they will present that to the
>> end user in live cd or a predefined installation option be it with
>> the latest and greatest bits of their product or a not which may or
>> may not be influenced from feed backs from the micro community they
>> have established around the product they ship.
> SIGs will be given a lot of lattitude and the target user will be used
> for resolving conflicts between SIGs.
>
Not following you here as I see it there would be no conflicts if the
SIGs them selves decided who their target audience is.
>> The Fedora project in whole should give equal access to those bits
>> and devote equal amount of marketing resources to promote them.
> I disagree. Resources are limited. We need to prioritize marketing
> where it will best benefit the project.
1)
What would be the criteria to determine how to spend those resources.
2)
Should we not then be spending all those resources strictly on core
components on marketing the community in whole where all would benefit
not a sub community within the community in whole..
--
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
