[CentOS-devel] rhwas 5 work?

Sat Mar 29 16:00:09 UTC 2008
R P Herrold <herrold at owlriver.com>

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