The thread has become acrid and non-productive. Maybe start the thread again, only this time without a subject line that implies incompetence and laziness.

On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 2:26 PM, Timo Schoeler <timo.schoeler@riscworks.net> wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Garry.Dale wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 1:04 PM, Farkas Levente <lfarkas@lfarkas.org> wrote:
>
>> <snip>
>> ...and currently everything depend on one single
>> man. that's the main reason why it's takes many months.
>
>
> Is it possilble to declare this thread officially ridiculous?  And shut it
> down?
>
> gd

Why is it ridiculous? Different people asked what facts there might be
against opening the development process of CentOS, and mainly those
questions where based on the fact that people wanted to *help*. That was
their intention.

It was not whining about "when is bla available" etc, like the usual
stuff. So, basically, it was a bunch of *valid* questions.

However, all that was replied was "it's never gonna happen" (to be more
open) -- why not? -- and "give me 90k GBP and all will be fine" -- what
for, salary? Why not purchasing a RHEL license, then?

This was inadequate pseudo answers.

This sounds more like a discussion of a sect or cult than a mailing list
of 'the *C*ommunity *ENT*erprise OS. Sorry, but that's more than
evident, see the list archive if needed.

Timo

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with CentOS - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iD8DBQFNJMXwO/2mgkVVV7kRAgJzAJ0YboC6ThJFoZb2CmwJYHNh0PA6kgCfUVMe
l1q8srI1jpeCbyjsKjjXOqo=
=EBi6
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
CentOS-devel mailing list
CentOS-devel@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel