On 12/9/20 7:14 AM, Julien Pivotto wrote:
> On 09 Dec 06:46, Johnny Hughes wrote:
>>
>> That is correct .. so, the Red Hat Liaison can use Section B. of the
>> Governance to dictate a vote. If the board FORCES the use of this
>> clause, then whatever was wanted (in this case by Red Hat) would get
>> inacted in its entirety with no real input from the board.
>>
>> https://www.centos.org/about/governance/voting/
>>
>> The CentOS Board knows this, so we had a dialoge with Red Hat instead.
>> Red Hat presented their case and listened to our response.  There was a
>> significant back and forth.
>>
>> So, no one 'FORCED' the board to do anything.  Red Hat told us what they
>> were going to do (what you quoted).  The board then made many
>> recommendations in a back and forth negotiation.  The board then made a
>> decision.  The decision was reluctant .. but it was unanimous.
>>
>> And now this is the way forward.
>
>
> Johnny,
>
> As this was not dictated by Section B, it seems that the board could
> revert this decision by another vote.
>
> I'd like to see this topic re-discussed, based on community feedback. Is
> that a possibility?
>

I very much doubt it. I have been doing this for 17 years and CentOS is
basically my life's work.  This was (for me personally) a heart
wrenching decision.  However, i see no other decision as a possibility.
 If there was, it would have been made.

As I said, there was a back and forth.  We got all the concessions we
could get.  It is what it is.  But as I also said, it was a unanimous
decision.