On Fri, Jun 2, 2023, 9:09 AM Matthew Miller <mattdm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:mattdm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>> wrote: I think this sentiment is getting ahead of things. This thread _is_ that effort. Yes, but. In general, a better approach is to say "we plan on orphaning the packages in $timeframe".
... RH, for the moment is still represented as on the DocFoundation's Advisory Board, https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/TDF/Advisory_Board#Composition_of_the_Advisory_Board https://www.documentfoundation.org/advisory-board/ Has there been any indication yet as to their withdrawal there? or not? Dev comms with devs is one approach aspect of engagement with LO. Engagement at the organizational level is another. If RH's organizational support, or lack thereof, is now a risk -- existential or not -- then perhaps spreading that risk across other orgs' interests & support has possible value. Do any of the Fedora Project guidelines -- particularly any restrictions by RH's legal -- prevent increased/direct engagement with the DF's governance/advisory groups? Dev list is probly also not the right place for that discussion. BUT, it's where the immediate, legitimate discussion IS being had. _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
