Jason Brown wrote: > On 03/04/2011 08:42 AM, m.roth at 5-cent.us wrote: > >> robert mena wrote: >> >>> Well, I am just telling that since there is no actual schedule, no plans >>> to change the way things are handled (lack of communication, treat this as >>> personal project etc) the best way to simply forget about it. >>> >>> The solution is good now and will be good whenever it appears. So there >>> >> <snip> >> Actually, it strikes me that I *do* have a question: what are the main >> problems in the build/release? Has RH deliberately obscured some part(s) >> of its build process, or made prerequisites utterly dependent upon >> specific versions of libraries - that is, more than y'all have had to deal >> with before? >> >> Note that this is a question about the problemss, *not* about how y'all >> are going about it, nor whining that I Want It Yesterday!!! As someone who >> spent a lot of years as a developer (and let's not talk about the death >> march at a former Baby Bell), I like to know the kinds of problems that >> are ongoing, so I can get some feel for what's going on. >> >> mark "sorry, no time to do some of the real work, RL is overwhelming >> at the moment" >> >> _______________________________________________ >> CentOS mailing list >> CentOS at centos.org >> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos >> > > I saw this posted yesterday on h-online.com. > > http://www.h-online.com/open/news/item/Controversy-surrounds-Red-Hat-s-obfuscated-source-code-release-1200554.html > Once again Oracle business practices screw it up for the rest of the world. > _______________________________________________ > CentOS mailing list > CentOS at centos.org > http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos > -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: rkampen.vcf Type: text/x-vcard Size: 322 bytes Desc: not available URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20110304/a871d79b/attachment-0005.vcf>