[fab] JBJ considered harmfull

[Josh Boyer]

On Tue, 2006-08-08 at 13:10 -0400, Greg DeKoenigsberg wrote:
> 
> Here are the questions that we *must* answer.  If internal engineering at 
> Red Hat is not willing to answer them, then the august body that is the 
> Fedora Board must at least take a position.
> 
> 1. Who is the upstream provider of RPM?  Is it rpm.org?  jbj?  Red Hat?  
> Fedora?
> 
> 2. If we are not the upstream of RPM -- and I'd argue we're not -- is it 
> our intention to reunite with the RPM codebase at some point in the 
> future, or not?
> 
> 3. If we are not going to rejoin with upstream RPM -- and I'd argue we're
> not -- then we have, in fact, forked RPM.  Therefore, what's the name of
> the new project, who is the upstream (Red Hat? Fedora?) and how do we act
> as an effective upstream for this project?
> 
> We will continue to deal with these unpleasant issues until we have the 
> courage to resolve them.
> 
> Again, just my $0.02.

Gets my $0.02 as well.

josh