Feedback on secondary architecture promotion requirements draft

[Jared K. Smith]

On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 3:01 PM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson"
<johannbg at gmail.com> wrote:
> Perhaps we need to separate all ( legal? ) connections to Red Hat ( Red Hat
> would then just donate via the same method than anyone else ) to make this
> work or directly donate money/hw/stuff directly to each individual SIG's
> representatives or perhaps to ambassadors?

For what benefit?  Again, if Red Hat is still providing the majority
of the funding and resources for Fedora, we still end up looking like
a tax shelter.  If Red Hat isn't providing the majority of the funding
for Fedora, then unless a miracle happens and we get a *metric ton* of
other funding, we'd end up with less resources than we have now.  (And
that's just speaking of the budget that Red Hat gives to Fedora, not
to mention the salaries for the FPL, members of the infrastructure
team, the colocation facilities, the legal support and defense, the
public relations help, and so on.)

Le me put it much more bluntly: I think the relationship with Red Hat
is very beneficial to Fedora, and Fedora is beneficial to Red Hat, and
trying to put significant distance between the two is going to cause
more problems than it's worth.  Again, in an ideal world, we'd be able
to do more than we can now -- but there just happens to be a big gap
between theory and reality that we can't easily ignore.

--
Jared Smith