On Sun, 2008-01-06 at 12:49 -0600, Les Mikesell wrote: > Craig White wrote: > > >>> Peter's assertion is surely clear enough, that Fedora does have > >>> community participation and you can join the development group to help > >>> guide the packaging, at least to become involved in the process but > >>> clearly you want this ability without the commitment. Some people choose > >>> to curse the darkness and some choose to light candles. > >> I'm not interested in helping a distribution become self-contained and a > >> limited subset of what it could be if it simply cooperated with > >> independent 3rd parties. > > ---- > > and the likelihood that you will still be on this list 2 years from now, > > cursing the same darkness and lighting no candles? > > That depends on what changes, of course. The only way a candle could be > lit would be to change policy, which isn't something I can do. My main > reasons for caring about fedora at all is that it historically is a > preview of what RHEL/Centos will be in the next release and it shares > the same administration style. If their courses continue to diverge in > ways like the Sun jvm inclusion in RHEL, jpackage breakage in fedora > there won't be a compelling reason to deal with the usability issues. Or > if my company finds a better alternative for the server side to replace > RHEL/Centos (and we do have someone promoting Suse), then the > administrative similarities will no longer be interesting. But, I sort > of expect the same old things to continue and it might be inconvenient > to get the support contracts for some software moved over to a different OS. ---- SuSE, Ubuntu offers SLA's How many systems/entitlements do you manage that have RHEL/WS SLA's anyway? Perhaps you can get Red Hat's attention. Craig
