On 1/8/20 7:43 AM, Johnny Hughes wrote: >> I don't think it's*entirely* fair to say that the fixes offered weren't >> relevant to CentOS, when no one outside the core maintainers had access >> to the build process, where fixes relevant to CentOS could be offered. > That is because CentOS Linux (other than Stream) is a rebuild of RHEL > source code .. so, that is how things get into base CentOS Linux. Yes, I know. > We don't accept input that deviates base CentOS Linux from RHEL source code. Of course not. But that's not the point. Neal pointed out that the process of debranding and rebuilding CentOS is not a community process, and that the user community takes and does not give back much. That is true. I agree with him. I don't, however, know a good reason to believe that the community doesn't want to contribute, or isn't capable of contributing. I have seen people offer to contribute numerous times, especially when new major or minor releases lag far behind upstream. I tend to think those lags are evidence that the project does need more contributors, but I simply don't know any way for capable people to access the work queue and assist in getting it done. When I look at https://wiki.centos.org/Contribute , I don't see any entry points for capable people to participate early in the process. I see a note that testing packages are announced on the devel list, but that's pretty far along in the process. It's hard to imagine that participating at that point will significantly improve the turnaround time for the process of rebuilding and publishing the system. I could be wrong, since I see the situation from the perspective of the user community that I'm a part of, but my point is that Jim said "there wasn't really much of a way to give back that didn't make the project deviate from its core mission" and that is literally true. I'm not arguing otherwise. I just want to suggest that the fact that there wasn't a way to give back without deviating from the core mission is the result of decisions that the developers made to keep the process very closed and private, and we should acknowledge that when we're discussing community contributions.