On Mon, 2008-10-13 at 23:37 -0500, Jeffrey Ollie wrote: > On Mon, Oct 13, 2008 at 9:39 PM, Chris Weyl <cweyl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > What does it say about freedom, when we say > > "Use Fedora and be free! ...except, you know, how you want to." Why > > are we spending so much time and effort saying no, instead of getting > > out of the way of those who are interested in doing it and watching it > > succeed or fail on its merits? > > "We" are saying no because "they" want "us" to do something, rather > than doing it themselves. All of the software that goes into > producing Fedora is free (in both the Beer and Speech senses). What > *isn't* free is the infrastructure that goes into producing Fedora > releases (the power/cooling/bandwidth/hardware as well as the time of > the various employees and volunteers). *I* think that Red Hat has > been extremely generous in letting us use that infrastructure to build > a cool distribution like Fedora. Well, it had been RH's deliberate decision to do so. /me thinks, they actually had no other choice at that time. > But why should Red Hat (and those of us that believe in the current > Fedora mission) let that infrastructure and perhaps more importantly > the Fedora brand get used for some "Fedora LTS" project? Marketing, customer bonding, ... ? > Based upon > the failure of the Fedora Legacy project and the most recent > discussion there are only a few people interested in volunteering > their time to such a project. And from what I've seen in this latest > discussion the LTS project goals are either ill-defined or > overambitious or both. Your opinion. Ralf -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
