On 1/5/2011 1:04 PM, Farkas Levente wrote:
>
>>>> On 1/5/2011 6:45 AM, Karanbir Singh wrote:
>>>>> But lets do the right
>>>>> thing rather than just doing something. Going by the popularist current
>>>>> mood of people on this list, I think people just want early access to a
>>>>> codebase they can start using for their own use...
>>>>
>>>> I thought that was the very definition of an open process...
>>>
>>> What came to my mind on my way home from the office: Maybe Karanbir has
>>> a different definition of 'community' (wasn't that what the 'C' in
>>> 'CentOS' was for?) in mind...?
>>
>> I do understand the conflict, just pointing out the other side. The
>> goal for Centos isn't so much to build a 'better' distro by accumulating
>> fixes that make it better for particular purposes as it is to build as
>> nearly exact a copy of RHEL as legally permitted. But community
>> involvement happens because people need to fix something for their own use.
>
> no. if centos would be so simple rhel rebuild then centos-6 could be
> released 3 days after rhel-6. there are many different things that
> should have to be done. and currently everything depend on one single
> man. that's the main reason why it's takes many months.
But the changes to make it legally permitted are what they've said they
would accept help on. Without any real guidance on what that means or
how to verify correctness.
--
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell at gmail.com