EPEL (was Re: RFC: Proposal for a more agile "Fedora.next" (draft of my Flock talk))

[Matthew Miller]

On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 03:51:43PM +0000, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
> >If people are interested in stepping up to make this happen and have a
> >long-term sustainable plan, that would be awesome.
> Come to think of it Red Hat itself is not willing to invest in
> extended release cycle of Fedora even if it bridge only the cap
> between RHEL releases so those individual willing to do the work
> would have to co-own the relevant components that all the RH
> employees own.

This is making the totally wrong assumption that Red Hat employees only
contribute to Fedora where they are told to; that is certainly not
universally the case and even more certainly not the case for the Red Hat
employees who are very active and visible in the community.

That said, yes: Fedora relies significantly on engineering time and other
resources paid for by Red Hat, and if we want to extend this in a guaranteed
way, we need to make the case that it's in Red Hat's best interest to do so.
Complaining that they ought to isn't sufficient; it needs to be compelling.

(And, fundamentally, this comes down to what I said earlier: it's to
Fedora's advantage that we have a close relationship with our downstream
distribution.)


-- 
Matthew Miller  ☁☁☁  Fedora Cloud Architect  ☁☁☁  <mattdm at fedoraproject.org>