Dear Matthew,
I get that you might be upset. Please read that one more time:
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.
As a person who is making Enterprise Linux rebuild and surrounding stack rebuilds for a few years, I cannot imagine how much this decision meant for Johnny. 17 years. It's a lot. I also believe that by saying "This was (for me personally) a heart wrenching decision." he also says that he made the unambiguous statement about this decision when he was asked. Saying that "We will not give up, like you did." sounds a little bit too passive-aggressive IMO. Don't blame passionate technical people like one on this list on probably higher-ups decision.
I also believe that because of this decision incoming year will bring some considerable changes in the Enterprise Linux/HPC landscape.
Best, Alex
On 12/9/20 2:34 PM, Phelps, Matthew wrote:
On Wed, Dec 9, 2020 at 8:24 AM Johnny Hughes <johnny@centos.org mailto:johnny@centos.org> wrote:
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/ <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.So who on the RedHat side can we plead with? We will not give up, like you did.
--
*Matt Phelps*
*Information Technology Specialist, Systems Administrator*
(Computation Facility, Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory)
Center for Astrophysics | Harvard & Smithsonian
60 Garden Street | MS 39 | Cambridge, MA 02138
email: mphelps@cfa.harvard.edu mailto:mphelps@cfa.harvard.edu
cfa.harvard.edu http://cfa.harvard.edu/| Facebook http://cfa.harvard.edu/facebook| Twitter http://cfa.harvard.edu/twitter| YouTube http://cfa.harvard.edu/youtube| Newsletter http://cfa.harvard.edu/newsletter
CentOS-devel mailing list CentOS-devel@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel