FPL steps down: what's the real story?

[Marcel Rieux]

On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 10:14 PM, Craig White <craigwhite at azapple.com> wrote:

> On Thu, 2010-04-01 at 22:02 -0400, Marcel Rieux wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 5:42 PM, Craig White <craigwhite at azapple.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >         On Thu, 2010-04-01 at 17:23 -0400, Marcel Rieux wrote:
> >
> >
> >         as far as I can tell, you seem to be the only one confused
> >         about Red
> >         Hat/Fedora. Fedora is a completely separate entity with its
> >         own
> >         management, resources, servers though clearly it was incubated
> >         using
> >         resources supplied by Red Hat.
> >
> > Aaaah! So you found them! All along my research, I've been looking for
> > the Fedora statutes. Normally, this document should be linked to the
> > home page... and I couldn't find it! The best I could get was the
> > composition of the board.
> >
> > So, let's talk. Where are the statutes, where you learned that Fedora
> > is a completely separate entity?
> ----
> I am sure I learned about it when Fedora was first announced.
>
> Not very hard to find out about Fedora Governance...
>
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Board
>
> That's the document about the board I was referring to, but it's not Fedora
statutes, it doesn't say where Fedora stands in relation to Red Hat. Nowhere
in this document will you find something to back your assertion that "Fedora
is a completely separate entity".

As a matter of fact, as Fedora is mainly financed by Red Hat as a test bench
for RHEL, I can hardly see how Fedora could stand as "a completely separate
entity". CentOS and Scientific Linux are separate entities from Red Hat, not
Fedora.

Maybe this should be made clearer so that developers understand what kind of
project they're involved in. There are advantages working for a major Linux
distribution such as Red Hat. Are there enough, I don't know. This is a
question I raise in the case study I'm about to submit.

It's not time to discuss this here but I certainly believe that developers'
contribution should be more fully acknowledged, and I mean this not only in
an abstract manner. For the unrest to cease -- because there is some unrest
-- the relation between development and management will have to evolve, just
to make sure that it's impossible from now on for a CEO and his wife to run
away with hundreds of millions $, leaving developers sixpence none the
richer(1).

(1) Of course, this is now impossible, but a sense of balance must still be
established.

When you ask developers to work, at least at the beginning, for free, you
must play an honest game. Otherwise, you won't get the best. There should be
a dynamic way to define when the beginning is being stretched too far,
without tying development and management by any obligation.

Investors also will gain from a development model that works.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20100401/86356753/attachment.html