On 08 Mar 09:26, redbaronbrowser via CentOS-devel wrote: > On Wednesday, March 3, 2021 11:56 AM, Rich Bowen <rbowen at redhat.com> wrote: > > > We will be holding the event May 13th and 14th, once again using the > > Hopin platform that we used last time. (Those of you who sent feedback > > about the platform may like to know that this was all passed on to > > Hopin, and at least some of it has been addressed since then.) > > Will we always be stuck with whatever RH OSPO (odd name for a group that chooses non-FOSS software) selects for the CentOS Dojos? > > It would be nice if the feedback from the CentOS community will helping to enrich a FOSS project as well. > > If CentOS is strictly controlled by the RH OSPO for each of these dojo's, can we get information from the RH OSPO on why they ruled out all FOSS software for this purpose? What features still need to be added for the Open Source Program Office to embrace Open Source? > > I understand the tight time constraints for having something that was ready in time for FOSDEM. But it seems like even when time is not the pressing item that there are other unstated issues making Closed Source services preferable for CentOS than FOSS. My 2c Creating and managing a platform for online event is out of scope for the CentOS project, and it is very very time consuming. It is also very hard to get it right. I don't think that this is what matters the most here, and that it is the place where our time is best spent. > _______________________________________________ > CentOS-devel mailing list > CentOS-devel at centos.org > https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel -- (o- Julien Pivotto //\ Config Management SIG V_/_ https://frama.link/cfgmgmt -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 228 bytes Desc: not available URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/attachments/20210308/ec9eda06/attachment-0005.sig>