On Wed, Dec 9, 2020 at 8:25 AM Johnny Hughes <johnny at centos.org> wrote: > > 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. Without naming names to protect who shared me this story, someone I know who was at one level below the CEO of a given company was in a meeting where the CEO decided to make this, er, Interesting decision. Members of the meeting brought up some concerns and then started a discussion on how to adjust the CEO plan to address or minimize the impact of the concerns. At a certain point the CEO exploded and said "you people are wasting my time. All I want is thumbs up or thumbs down. Choose now!" Now, everyone knew if you wanted to go against the CEO you may want to brush your resume and keep your network current first; in his first year at that company he fired some 50 managers and replaced them with "people who were more appreciative to his grand view." So, it was a unanimous vote. One of the unplanned consequences was many of their brightest employees started jumping ship as soon as the decision was announced. Two years later that CEO announced *he* decided to step down. In other words, Johnny I think most people on this list would like to thank you for all the effort you have put to make CentOS what it is. And some of us can appreciate the situation you have been put in and will not blame you for the decision you had to make. We are not here to shoot the messenger; we are just pointing out there will be (not really) unexpected consequences to the CentOS move to the flow/leaky model. Some people will be able to adapt to it and follow that cheese, others will choose to look for another cheese. All I can say is that this chapter of the CentOS/RH/IBM story is coming to an end and a new one is beginning. And, I like cheese