On 1/10/20 7:19 AM, Johnny Hughes wrote: > Well sure .. but that is also true for any Linux distribution. It's not > like Ubuntu or Debian or Linux Mint (or anyone else) let community > members build their distributions. Debian and Fedora are exactly the kind of community-driven projects that I think CentOS should be, but isn't. They have documented processes for becoming a maintainer. Their package management is publicly available, so their current status and activity level are clearly visible. Anyone can fork a package, build and test their changes, and send suggested changes back in the form of a pull request in order to contribute to an existing maintainer without requiring access to build and publish their changes to end users. CentOS does not have an onboarding process that I'm aware of, and does not appear to believe it needs one. There is a "git.centos.org" system, but all of the repos I looked at are empty (It's possible that's because I'm not logged in. Logging in currently results in a fatal error. Either way, it's disappointing). Koji is apparently gated to Red Hat QA only, so there's no opportunity or mechanism to collaborate until very late in the process. Point being: I agree with the people in this thread who think it would be premature to discontinue Fedora Server, until CentOS becomes a mature community project. > We are never going to allow other people to build things not in our > validated systems and then sign and release it with CentOS Keys as > CentOS Linux. That would be ridiculously stupid :) Of course it would. I'm bewildered as to why you're even arguing that point. It's possible that you think we are ridiculously stupid. It's possible that you're arguing in bad faith. It's possible that you're unfamiliar with the collaboration processes common across the entire Free Software community. None of those would be to your credit, so I'd love to hear another explanation.