Appointment of Board Members.

[Greg DeKoenigsberg]

On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 2:32 PM, seth vidal <skvidal at fedoraproject.org>wrote:

> On Mon, 2010-08-16 at 23:45 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
>
> > I would like those things too but it is a balance.  Oracle taking over
> > Sun and screwing up things (Oracle lawsuit against Google,  Shutting
> > down Postgres test servers, OpenSolaris etc) has been pushing me towards
> > advocating more diversity and less centralized control.
> >
>
> Okay, now I'm good and confused.
>
> Let's say red hat gets purchased by $evil_company. What exactly is it
> you think fedora's going to be able to do?
>
> A huge number of developers/maintainers on crit-path are going to be
> either:
> 1. allowed to do what they are doing now
> 2. not allowed to do what they are doing now
>
> If it is the first then fedora continues as-is and it has nothing to do
> with who is in control of the board.
>
> If it is the second then fedora is 'done', if only b/c all of our releng
> and central mail(bastion) infrastructure is owned by red hat and no
> matter who is on the board, that ownership of resources doesn't change.
>
> I just don't see the point in worrying about it. If red hat gets
> consumed and the consuming company is $evil then fedora is, for all
> intents and purposes, over. The devels working for red hat or not
> working for red hat will just pick up whatever pieces they have and
> either rename/relocate or they will not.
>
> If it was me, and I had to pick up the pieces, I wouldn't even try to
> keep the fedora name (not that the trademark ownership would let you
> anyway). There's a small amount of brand-recognition advantage and a lot
> of legacy crap to carry over with.
>
> So what's the point in de-centralizing it? What do we get out of it?
>

Quoted for truth.

--g
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/advisory-board/attachments/20100816/e5e67ed9/attachment-0001.html