On Fri, 2007-04-06 at 13:53 -0400, Jesse Keating wrote: > On Friday 06 April 2007 13:44:40 Nicolas Mailhot wrote: > > Because we all know/hope Red Hat has an internal plan for his own > > software, and collisions between such internal plans and community > > efforts in the past have not been pretty? You get the usual maintainer > > protectiveness plus the corporate / volunteer barrier. > > That's assuming that every part of Red Hat has the same plan / goal as every > other part of Red Hat, and that isn't always the case. The JBoss folks have > a goal to continue delivering things to their existing customers that they > were before RH acquired them. Fedora has a different set of goals, which > involves native packaging of JBOSS software for use on Fedora. These are > just two examples of what the two groups might have for goals. There are > many many others, and surprise, some of them may directly conflict. > Thankfully different people will be working on them differently and there is > a chance that these goals may be achieved. > I think a fair goal for fedora that we won't get any objection on is this: if it is free software and legal to ship then we are for including it. If jboss can be packaged to work with gcj in that way, then there is no reason to oppose it. If someone can come up with a compelling reason why we should not follow the above then, by all means, come and talk about it. -sv -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
