2011/2/16 Karanbir Singh <mail-lists at karan.org>: > On 02/16/2011 02:22 PM, Morten P.D. Stevens wrote: >> The best example is Scientific Linux. There are schedules and an open development process. >> >> What is the reason for the closed development process in CentOS? > > Its funny you say that Morten, since you actually offered to help. Didnt > you ? But then when I asked you to look at something specific, you > backed off saying you had other things to do ( I remember being quite > taken aback by your response at the time ). > > Why you dont you just stick to lurking, since you clearly dont actually > want to do anything to help - just get in the way and try to make a lot > of noise you dont either understand or want to put any effort into > understanding. > > Would you call that a fair take on the state of your envolvement Morten ? Karanbir, this is not quite right. And you know it. I offered my help for testing. (qa process) You have offered me to help with packages that need upstream branding removed. This is very difficult to realize when the primary mailing list (centos-qa) is completely closed to outsiders. Many people (including me) would like to CentOS help if the development process would be more open. I think you are doing a great job with CentOS! And for that you have my full appreciation. Best regards, Morten