[CentOS-devel] rhwas 5 work?
R P Herrold
herrold at owlriver.com
Sat Mar 29 16:00:09 UTC 2008
On Sat, 29 Mar 2008, John Summerfield wrote:
> I'm the last person who should be negotiating on CentOS's behalf, _this_ has
> to be done by an acknowledged leader, whether it's Johnny, Karanbir or
> someone else. Someone with a sound knowledge of the issues, someone Sun will
> see as someone representing the project.
... If it should be done ** at all ** within CentOS. 'has to
be done' inplies obligation to do it; there is no such
obligation absent sufficient support. How shall those who do
it insure against the liability that Sun document purports to
impose? How shall that insurance be paid for? If a given
person wants to take that risk, uninsured, that is their
Shall the individuals who make up the CentOS project core put
their personal assets at risk, for free and without
compensation, to meet someone's 'expectation' for which they
have not paid? I think not.
And it is just not the case that the CentOS 'has to', nor
indeed _can_ be all things to all people. The mice can vote
to 'bell the cat' all they wish, but that does not do it
until some mouse does it.
This week, in another part of FOSS, Fedora finds itself in a
trap, fueled in part by 'what if' extreme remarks by some who
post here, to be 'more friendly' to users who will not learn
the Unix ways of PATH. If Fedora proceeds that way, it is at
risk of being not Unix0like any more. It would lose parts of
the aspects which make Fedora a proving ground for Enterprise
distributions. Gentoo, and Ubuntu can do that just fine
already. If it goes that way, Fedora commits suicide.
Part of an Enterprise approach is growing up, putting aside
childish ways, and being 'businesslike'. I like CentOS as a
boring and reliable environment in which to live
professionally. I will continue to argue strongly against
risking its continued existence.
-- Russ herrold
More information about the CentOS-devel