The Register has an article about CentOS: https://www.theregister.com/2021/01/26/killing_centos/
My best guess is the title and how the quotes form the interview was framed in the article wasn't what Red Hat expected. Maybe the reader should be taken with a grain of salt.
I am posting it here for a number of reasons:
First, my guess is the majority of members of centos-devel mailing list have already seen the article or would have seen it regardless of if I posted the link to it here.
Second, I think it would be good to give someone from Red Hat a chance to respond to if there is inaccuracies in how the article characterizes things.
Third, is this how we expect governance of Stream to work moving forward?
El Reg's articles should always be read with irony attitude enabled. However, the topmost comment (containing "dinosaur outlooks" words) brings a familiar refrain.
And yes, Brian Exelbierd's "comment to comments" would be fine to know.
On 27.01.2021 06:21, redbaronbrowser via CentOS-devel wrote:
The Register has an article about CentOS: https://www.theregister.com/2021/01/26/killing_centos/
My best guess is the title and how the quotes form the interview was
framed in the article wasn't what Red Hat expected. Maybe the reader should be taken with a grain of salt.
I am posting it here for a number of reasons:
First, my guess is the majority of members of centos-devel mailing list
have already seen the article or would have seen it regardless of if I posted the link to it here.
Second, I think it would be good to give someone from Red Hat a chance to
respond to if there is inaccuracies in how the article characterizes things.
Third, is this how we expect governance of Stream to work moving forward?
-
Konstantin Boyandin -
redbaronbrowser