Move Evolution to Extras?

[Rahul Sundaram]

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. 

Rahul