-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 10/04/2013 11:14 AM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote: > On 10/04/2013 11:49 AM, Stephen Gallagher wrote: >> The main change being made here is with how we are presenting >> *The Fedora Project* to the world. In the past, we've tried to be >> all things to all people, but going forward we want to pick a few >> specific areas that we will focus on (and market) particularly. >> The wide world of Fedora software and packages will always be >> there. > > Why should the community participate in this when it turns out that > the the whole WG and the next proposal is nothing but an utter and > total sheninagan on RH behalf as came apparent on last FESCO > meeting > > " basically if whatever they come up with doesn't work for RH, it's > a non-starter." > > Sending a clear cut message to the community and people wanting to > participate in it so in a sense Red Hat has already > presentedFedora Project* to the world or at least it's view on it's > community. > I'm going to attempt to respond to this here, but I do realize it's going to be difficult to communicate my point clearly, especially amongst strong emotions. The phrasing used above was unfortunate and open to the wrong interpretation. Red Hat is not attempting to force its vision into the world. Red Hat has gotten as far as it has not by being a dictator but by being a facilitator. Red Hat as an organization recognizes that individual contributors in the greater community are an asset both to that community and to Red Hat and we don't want to alienate anyone with good ideas. Furthermore, our general philosophy is heavily centered around the idea that the community will sometimes come up with dissenting ideas that prove out to be better than Red Hat's current plans. Historically, the company's approach in those situations has been to re-target, often by hiring those individuals so that they can work on their idea full-time, rather than as a side-project. Now, what was really intended by that statement that you quoted above (and I acknowledge I'm putting words in people's mouths a bit) is that Red Hat *may* flex its muscles a bit if the community were to do something extremely unlikely that would be in direct opposition to the needs of Red Hat. And when I say "extreme", I'm talking in the neighborhood of "Fedora should drop the ix86 line and focus only on embedded ARM" or "Fedora should give up producing an OS entirely and become a package repository for CentOS". You are absolutely *not* going to see Red Hat micromanaging the creation of a Fedora-to-Red-Hat-specification because that would actively *degrade* the value of Fedora to Red Hat. Fedora is not just a testbed for RHEL, it's a proving ground for technologies, and those may eventually get included RHEL *from any source*, not just Red Hat. I cannot reiterate this statement enough "Red Hat cannot dictate Fedora because that action will actively remove the real benefit that Red Hat gets from Fedora". > "Here come and join Fedora we will allow you to do everything but > influence or participate in anykind of direction that project might > take but we do our best effort making you feel like you actually > are making a difference" > The Fedora Community *does* make a difference. We (Red Hat) could not do what we do without you. If that weren't the case, Red Hat would never spend the kind of money it does on funding Fedora rel-eng, FUDCons, Flock, FADs, representation at other conferences, swag, etc. Red Hat would spend that money *on Red Hat* if it didn't see value in the enabling these communities. > I can understand why people get the notion of that we are nothing > more the a freaking test bed for RH due to a disgrace and > disgusting corporate behaviour towards the community like was shown > on the last FESCO meeting when the true intention of RH was shown > with the direction of Fedora and how much community gets to be > involved in that decision. > > What a disgrace and disgusting corporate behaviour towards the > community that took place on that meeting putting Red Hat on par > with Canonical. > > Truly a dark day in Fedora history that took place there on that > meeting. > > But I think Stephen for trying to propose to certain extent fair > proposal on how to handle the working group nominations > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.14 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iEYEARECAAYFAlJO4ncACgkQeiVVYja6o6Ng7QCfe6e9wlmmr7NJR1mnqPU/ZzP1 KN0An0coNmGufuMQWN0KEDufxKTz8Ti4 =TWZ8 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
