On Wed, 2006-04-12 at 09:47 -0400, Dimi Paun wrote:
On Wed, 2006-04-12 at 18:58 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> You are over over-dramatizing. This is not a place for enterprises to
> get technology guidance and nobody's personal opinions here is going
> to cost anyone untold millions.
Give me a break. Alan is just not anybody, and neither is dwmw2,
and others in Red Hat. Also, we've just been told how Fedora is
essential to Red Hat's business strategy, and why we can't have
a Foundation. Which is fine by me, but this means you can not
have this 100% separation between Fedora and Red Hat, which is
conveniently waved whenever there are uncomfortable questions.
Clarification: Administrative costs are far more of a important factor
than business strategies in the decision to fold the foundation. Feel
free to ask questions regardless of its comfort values.
And please don't tell me there's no connection with RHEL. We
wouldn't have this conversation now if Evo would be maintained.
If you can maintain it for RHEL, I can't see why it will not
be maintained for Fedora. And if so, this discussion would be moot.
But since lots of RH people call for its immediate demise, it
can only mean that it's going to be dumped in RHEL as well.
Dumping Evo now, after being pushed for years by RH, can not
be a Good Thing (TM).
Artificially tying up this discussion to RHEL would be stifling up a
open discussion on potential alternatives. RHEL customers have better
channels to discuss their concerns.