I've been a bit late to get to the Distrowatch weekly this week but I finally heard about Paul Frields, the Fedora Project Leader, stepping down.<br><br>"I’m interested in branching out into other ways of championing free and open source software at Red Hat", he says.<br>
<br><a href="http://marilyn.frields.org:8080/~paul/wordpress/?p=3085">http://marilyn.frields.org:8080/~paul/wordpress/?p=3085</a><br><br>But is this really all there is to it? In a bottom note, he adds that "it might have been difficult to figure out how to write this message" and that he had to look "to see how our previous FPL handled the delicate matter of succession".<br>
<br>About 2 weeks ago, I skimmed over an article explaining that there was some unrest between developers or administrators as to the direction Fedora should take. Some were for faster updates to the stable release, some for a more stable stable release. <br>
<br>Frields being named by Red Hat, and Red Hat being more server than desktop oriented, was, I believe, for using Fedora as a test bench and for faster updates, whereas the other clan stood for competing against the likes of Ubuntu and providing more stable releases. Whatever the case may be, Frields kinda got caught up in the middle. Maybe he decided it was too hot to handle?<br>
<br>Of course, I could study the matter myself but, my pharmacist and doctor disagreeing on the matter, I'll have to spend a "little time" estimating the appropriateness of prescribing IECA (Coversyl) with ARA (Cozaar) in my peculair case. If you don't know what fun is, this looks pretty much like it:)<br>
<br>So, I was wondering if somebody who followed the matter could just drop a few lines explaing what the real story is.<br><br>TIA.<br>