On 9/12/20 09:46, Johnny Hughes wrote: > On 12/8/20 7:47 PM, Rob Thomas wrote: >> I'm sure it was just phrasing. Perhaps if you asked 'Was this decision >> forced on the CentOS board?' you'd get a different answer. >> >> >> On Wed, 9 Dec 2020 at 11:03, Mário Barbosa <mario.barbosa at gmail.com >> <mailto:mario.barbosa at gmail.com>> wrote: >> >> On 2020/12/09 01:51, Johnny Hughes wrote: >> > On 12/8/20 6:24 PM, Phelps, Matthew wrote: >> >> >> >> Was this decision forced, despite objection, on the CentOS board >> by the >> >> RedHat Liaison? >> >> >> >> Yes or No? >> > >> > No >> >> Come on, man: >> >> "[...] Given this, we’ve informed the CentOS Project Governing Board >> that we are shifting our investment fully from CentOS Linux to CentOS >> Stream." >> >> ... in >> https://www.redhat.com/en/blog/centos-stream-building-innovative-future-enterprise-linux >> <https://www.redhat.com/en/blog/centos-stream-building-innovative-future-enterprise-linux> >> > 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/ > > 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. > ______________________________________________ When the two only options are to be shot in the head or in the leg, the leg is the obvious choice, that doesn't mean that you had a real choice to begin with. Pablo