FPL steps down: what's the real story?

[Marcel Rieux]

I've been a bit late to get to the Distrowatch weekly this week but I
finally heard about Paul Frields, the Fedora Project Leader, stepping down.

"I’m interested in branching out into other ways of championing free and
open source software at Red Hat", he says.

http://marilyn.frields.org:8080/~paul/wordpress/?p=3085

But is this really all there is to it? In a bottom note, he adds that "it
might have been difficult to figure out how to write this message" and that
he had to look "to see how our previous FPL handled the delicate matter of
succession".

About 2 weeks ago, I skimmed over an article explaining that there was some
unrest between developers or administrators as to the direction Fedora
should take. Some were for faster updates to the stable release, some for a
more stable stable release.

Frields being named by Red Hat, and Red Hat being more server than desktop
oriented, was, I believe, for using Fedora as a test bench and for faster
updates, whereas the other clan stood for competing against the likes of
Ubuntu and providing more stable releases. Whatever the case may be, Frields
kinda got caught up in the middle. Maybe he decided it was too hot to
handle?

Of course, I could study the matter myself but, my pharmacist and doctor
disagreeing on the matter, I'll have to spend a "little time" estimating the
appropriateness of prescribing IECA (Coversyl) with ARA (Cozaar) in my
peculair case. If you don't know what fun is, this looks pretty much like
it:)

So, I was wondering if somebody who followed the matter could just drop a
few lines explaing what the real story is.

TIA.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20100401/bfea8027/attachment.html