On Thu, Jul 24, 2008 at 9:33 AM, Arthur Pemberton <pemboa@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > What are your thoughts on the reason given? RPM had one feature that > was needed. But from what I've heard/read from others, RPM is lacking > many other features (better compression methods for example). RPM has > been (seemingly) pretty stagnant. I do not trust technical laypress articles to be accurate as to motivating prioritizes for any decision. Nor should you. We have the ability to have an open transparent dialog with Moblin, and we should not react to the interpretation of an article writer who is looking to attract eyeballs. I have come to expect technical laypress articles to be..sensational...and to note the most controversial of statements because they are controversial and not because they are the most important. I would not hold up The Register as a bastion of journalist integrity. I find, like most technical laypress, that articles are highly editorial in nature, and are not designed to be unbiased accounting of 'facts' or anything resembling investigative reporting. Until Dirk or another Moblin member is actually communicating directly with a Fedora community representative, who is looking to understand the Moblin prioritizes that underlie their decision making, I'm not going to assume the article accurately portrays the fundamental decision making process Moblin has gone through for moblin 2.0. Some decisions were made to move to basing Moblin 2 off of the Fedora kernel..that's the only thing I'm taking away from that article. Beyond that, I view the rest as subtle spin on the part of the Register staff to sensationalize the announcement. Especially the bit about RPM since it was not a direct quote attributed to Dirk. -jef -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
