seth vidal said: > > >> >> Red Hat does have developers involved in a number of Open Source >> software >> projects (either officially or unofficially). I would still trust >> anything I got from "redhat.com" more than I would something I got from >> "www.rr.com/~joesomeone". > > You're missing the point - a lot of the software that comes from > redhat.com comes from www.rr.com/~joesomeone/ No, a lot of the software from redhat.com comes from apache.org, sendmail.org, gnome.org, etc. If I pick 100 random freshmeat packages, they probably are not in the Red Hat distro. >> Then we are back to trusted sources, and if Red Hat is going to have to >> go >> around and select trusted sources, then your unsupported apps just got a >> whole lot support intensive again. > > That was my point. > > You can't expect red hat to audit every line of code > so you have to use some of your own common sense You are missing the point, now. Providing another packaging front end to seamlessly pull in third party packages increases support costs. Period. They will have to close bugs in bugzilla as unsupported. They have to find some "trusted" sources for these packages. They have to spend money on advertising to counter-act the "this update is broken, Red Hat sucks" (see the libdvd thread). And for what gain? -- William Hooper
