Rahul Sundaram wrote: Hi Rahul - >> - the name... as others said 'legacy' is almost completely negative >> > Maybe. Jesse Keating isnt a marketing guy. He called it what it was. That was my point in the previous post, he named it so well for what RH saw it as - the chance to dump it so they can go on with new things - people pick up on it. Well they need to dump stuff so as not to get stretched too thin, clear. But a different name will help. >> - Fedora Legacy had bad press on LWN and elsewhere for security update >> latencies in its early days >> > Because the community didnt step up to do the work required. Do it. > There is no magic bullets here. By the time you spend discussing how bad > legacy infrastructure is you could update the websites, QA a few > packages and throw in a few documentation and oh btw stop mailing me off > list about how kernel module proposal sucks or why RH people are jerks > because they didnt tell you about mono or why Mike Harris is a jerk > because he doesnt fix your favorite Xorg bug. I am not the be all end > all solution for your Fedora peeves. It would be nice if people dont > treat others like crap in fedora-list too but then maybe I am asking too > much. You certainly have a hard job, and respect is due. But I personally have not mailed you offlist AFAICR or done these other things, except possibly the occasional crap-treating. I simply pointed out it DID have some bad press, maybe that decreased the value of "Fedora Legacy" in peoples' minds, I am not complaining about it. I agree this community thing is a double-edged sword and despite your Wiki effort it isn't in such abundance as it could be coming into RH as opposed to out of it. >> - People are attracted to Fedora because of the level of trust they >> have in Redhat as a brand. When they see RH 'handing over' / disowning >> a Fedora version they get a bad feeling. It's the having done with it >> feeling in RH that led to the choice of the name 'legacy' in the first >> place. >> > I understand that but you can't have it both ways. When Red Hat does all > the work there is a complaint that it isnt letting anyone else do > anything. Now there is Fedora Extras, Documentation, Legacy and so on > where the community can make a impact and you want Red Hat doing all the > work?. We cant win this way. Yes, and I spoke up in support of that view on fedora-list yesterday. https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-list/2006-January/msg02481.html But again I was not complaining here, just noting it as an explanation for how Legacy is perceived. Well not everybody writing code in the general sense is ready to take up work like Legacy. Only in the last months did I get used to patch, diff, specfiles and so on and get a feel for autotools-based trees. Documentation really requires familiarity, it is out there but only certain people have it. Then there is the difficulty to manage what the contributor is enthused to do with what is seen as needed in RH. So to date I managed to add nothing but mailing list duty. Elsewhere in the GPL world I work on other things though. >> Here's a proposal... just give "fedora Legacy" the keys to the standard >> updates repo when its time is up. Updates just keep coming, from the > Agreed on that 100%. Good. -Andy
Attachment:
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
-- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
