Hi all, > Well, I know I have benefited from the discussion because I understand the > challenges that face the CentOS team with regards to security updates whilst > they are rebuilding a point release. As has been pointed out to me, we're > between a rock and a hard-place and it isn't just a simple matter of not > enough resourcing - which is what I thought the issue was... now I stand > corrected. Obviously, the security concern is not unreasonable because the > CentOS team are considering a different approach for 5.4. What I also now > know is this is inherent in any rebuild, so I know have to consider whether > a rebuild is the best approach for me. > > So, for those of you who consider this as "in-fighting", know that some > considers it "learning". My intend in starting this thread was not to start a 'fight' like this. I have neither expected these kind of (in my pov. quite ingnorant and arrotant) replies of some core devs. Of course CentOS is a project with clear targets and being open to everyone is not the first. I have also never said that it would be a good idea to let everybody into the so called 'core team' which is responsible for building the distribution. My idea of a board stands besides of development responsibilities and of course only approved members should be able to elect it. But therefor clear instructions of how to gain membership needs to be added and mentorship could help new maintainers to learn how to contribute. The board itself could then help to clear legal aspects and directions of the distriubtion. As quoted, the direction of CentOS is quite clear and contributions can only happen in some parts (e.g. wiki, documentation, translation, artwork, newsletter, bugtracking, web/forums and even package additions as long as there is a repo called 'Contrib'). At least these areas have to be line out clearer and I would definitly like to help on that. A 'invite only' QA is purely arbitrary and could just be removed or replaced with something like 'contributors will automatically gain access to QA'. Besides that, I still think that the build process needs tobe described in detail and published publicly. I would also make much sense to let the public know who in the 'core team' is responsible for what. The website is just outdated on that. To let you guys who just jumped in know: I wrote this because of the frustration I felt in the past weeks while contributing to the project. I spent a lot of hours on CentOS tasks and have often been told that things will change (e.g. opening the wiki, contributable 'Contrib' repo...) but not much happened till today. In the past I have always talked to Karan, Dag or Ralph about things like these but to address a larger audience I decided to post it here, instead. But I also understand the position of ppl out there who just 'take' and do not want to contribute. Maybe these should just not comment on a thread like this. Best Regards Marcus