Le 25/01/2014 21:38, Reindl Harald a écrit :
first:
be sure after the style of replies like yours i will
hestitate try to make compilemts again in the public
because the aggresive way you react leads nowhere else
then flamewars
I'd rather have you stop starting or feeding flamewars as you actively
did this month than
these kind of "compliments".
wow - even if someone makes a compliment it is taken rude - impressive
the difference shortly before a new RHEL release is that the timeframe
is *much* more important for the RH folks than some random release
accept it or not - you can't change the facts - period
You implied (and still imply) that most of the work is done by RH,
belittling the
volunteer contributors.
Off course, Red Hat is an important stakeholder in Fedora, but they
acknowledge that they're not
the ones driving the project it's the community.
That's why we dropped along the "Core/extras" distinctions, that's why
the effective technical leadership is handled by the Fesco (a true
community body) and that's why we're still
sponsored by Red Hat.
But let's say that it was a naive statement from you.
the only downside currently are some systemd mis-behaviors hopefully
resolved before F19 is EOL and F20 becomes mandatory on servers
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1023788
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1023820
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1010572
i really appreciate the distribution and only wish some major
features in F15-F17 would not appear again from the viewpoint
of their user-impact by "be first for a too high price"
"In cauda venenum"
Please read Fedora mission statement:
i do not need to read it 100 times
"The Fedora Project's mission is to *lead* the advancement of free and open source software and content as a
collaborative community." (emphasis is mine)
so what - lead does not mean "lead for every price at any moment of time"
I'm proud that we did these disruptive changes, because if we didn't, they might never have happened
you could be even more proud if they would have happened anyways
but not that disruptive
Many Fedora contributors feel the same (and a consequent number disagree too).
We're not doing to get the first place, just to bring and help mature the changes we feel right: systemd is one of
them. And what happened later proved us that we were right.
and systemd with the state of F16/F17 and more server packages converted to systemd-units
would not have been that disruptive - period - in general systemd is a great improvement
and honestly before F15 was released the description and goals where things i really loved
to see, but not in a hurry, not in that state
Remember that Fesco actually delayed systemd inclusion by one release
for very same reason:
"not to rush things".
At that time, it worked perfectly fine and we could have included it.
One funny thing is that without a community contributor (i mean JBG),
the transition to systemd
would have been much longer. No needs to wear a Red Hat to have an
impact in Fedora.
So you wanted to compliment the community, why did you felt the need to
end it by an
unrelated statement about systemd ?
Do you honestly think that if we continued with upstart and crappy sysV
init scripts,
we would have had less issues or less critical issues ?
regards,
H.
--
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
