The Inquirier on F17

Stephen John Smoogen smooge at gmail.com
Tue Jun 5 01:27:22 UTC 2012


On 4 June 2012 18:44, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" <johannbg at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 06/04/2012 11:44 PM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
>>
>> On 4 June 2012 17:01, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson"<johannbg at gmail.com>  wrote:
>>
>>> Not when there is a whole corporation voting for their *coworkers* in the
>>> elections which they either do so because of their own free will or
>>> because
>>> their manager might have put them up to it.
>
>
>
> This is a risk that comes with all corporation ( Red Hat including ) in
> community involvement.

For all the belly aching there is about corporations in Fedora.. can
someone please just fork Fedora, create their own utopian
non-corporate influenced project and run with it? Mainly because this
constant your corporation is killing my community is really really
tiresome like a broke record that should have been fixed in Fedora 3
or 6. I am pretty sure that with about 4-16 weeks worth of work 6->8
people could have a build system, bug tracking, mailing lists etc
setup and running.
....

> I never said Red Hat put them up to it but the risk certainly does exist (
> as it does with any corporate ).
>
> I know for a fact from one Red Hat maintainer within the project that could
> not update his package until his manager *granted* him permission to do so
> thus let me ask you this does the project have any public guarantee from Red
> Hat that their employees are allowed to make decision which may or may not
> be in the best interest of the company or it's partners without any
> ramification from within Red Hat with their participation in the project?
>
> In essence those Red Hat employees that are participating in the project
> regardless if it's of their own accord or as a part of their job description
> stand equal to any other community member and are acting of their own free
> will and their actions are entirely their own?
>
> If so feel free to point me to that statement so I can pass it on to other
> Red Hat employees to inform them that they don't need permission from their
> manager to maintain their own package as they see fit within the project...
>
> If that public statement/guarantee actually exist then I shall forever put
> my "base accusations about agendas and mystery agents" ( as you put it ) to
> sleep however if it does not exist I suggest you accept the fact that there
> is indeed distinction between Red Hat and it's employees and the
> community...

No there is no such statement and there isn't going to be such a
statement anymore than there is going to be a signed statement from
non-Red Hat employees they will update packages even if working on it
conflicts with other packages or their kids soccer match. There are
always going to be outside contingencies and trying to build a promise
against them is like holding back the tide.

Anyway, this conversation has nothing to do with marketing and is my
last on the subject.


-- 
Stephen J Smoogen.
"The core skill of innovators is error recovery, not failure avoidance."
Randy Nelson, President of Pixar University.
"Years ago my mother used to say to me,... Elwood, you must be oh
so smart or oh so pleasant. Well, for years I was smart. I
recommend pleasant. You may quote me."  —James Stewart as Elwood P. Dowd


More information about the marketing mailing list