On Fri, Oct 19, 2018 at 10:40:18AM -0400, Neal Gompa wrote: > I don't like saying this, but what it comes down to is that our > relationship with RHEL has evolved into a one-sided affair. I wish > someone who is empowered to do something about it would, but the rest > of us can't. > > Frankly, I suspect you're the only person who could maybe do anything > about it, and I'm not certain you could do anything about it. Time to pull back the curtain a little bit, I guess. :) I think the issue isn't really RHEL-Fedora, but Red Hat-Fedora. Red Hat isn't a large company in the sense of Oracle or SAP or whatever, let alone Microsoft or Apple, but it's much bigger than it used to be, and much bigger than RHEL. Most of Red Hat's _financial_ engagement in Fedora comes from two places: Platform (i.e., RHEL) and associated groups like QE, and from the CTO's office via OSAS. In the first bucket, that's hardware and infrastructure, the people paid to be on the community infra team (and work in Fedora Infrastructure and Rel-Eng), and me. In the second, the CTO's office, that's Bex — and now Sanja on CoreOS and Silverblue — and also our community budget. On the Platform side, it's easy (and, increasingly so, really!) to get Red Hat interested Fedora technology that has a direct connection to improving, well, the platform. This is the answer to why funding for Pagure and not HyperKitty or Hubs. The src.fedoraproject.org thing and what we're working on with shared dist-git with CentOS... easy dots to connect. This part of Red Hat *cares* about Fedora as a succcessful community, but also has to justify spending, and as the company overall invests in OpenShift in the Enterprise, there's not a lot of extra. Meanwhile, the other side of the coin, over in the CTO's office — Fedora's community budget and staffing is a significant chunk already. (The Discourse experiment funding is coming through Sanja and not the Fedora community budget, FWIW.) As much as I think the CTO's office *should*, they don't have a group of programmers available to work on community open source tooling. I definitely am pushing as much as I can for more of that kind of investment, and ... maybe some things will bear fruit. I have to say, though (since it's super-relevant to the discussion here) one of the very first questions I get every time is: "Why does Fedora have so much of its own stuff when there are open source alternatives? What's with the huge NIH complex?" I do a lot of shoving rocks uphill on that one! But if we want this to be a two-way balanced relationship, it can't be all "Red Hat isn't spending enough money on Fedora's non-engineering needs!". What else do you (not just Neal — take this as an open question!) think we should do differently from a Red Hat side? -- Matthew Miller <mattdm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Fedora Project Leader _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
