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/ >> >> 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.