[fab] project hosting?

[Paul W. Frields]

On Wed, 2006-04-19 at 15:45 -0400, Jesse Keating wrote:
> On Wed, 2006-04-19 at 12:34 -0700, Colin Bodell wrote:
> > Why should it be avoided? SourceForge.net is not open source yet 
> > delivers a tremendous service to the community.
> > We should focus on capability and community value. You get a no cost, 
> > turnkey, hosted system with  admin, backup network that you
> > can configure the meet the needs of the Fedora community etc. That's
> > not 
> > a bad deal in my book. Compare SourceForge Enterprise
> > against, say, Savannah (except there is not much of a comparison).
> > I'd 
> > be happy to admin it for the community too :-) 
> 
> Because of Fedora's goals of being once open, always open.  Anything
> Fedora should be built up from OpenSource software.  This includes the
> software that Red Hat users to put it together, there is something of a
> push to open that software too.  (note that I'm speaking as a person,
> NOT RED HAT)  Using proprietary software to facilitate the project is a
> nonstarter IMHO.

If I was the kind of person to say "+1," I'd do it here.  The goal of
the project is to advance open source software.  Relying on proprietary
software to run project bits runs counter to the goal, therefore my vote
is against proprietary.  Your offer is appreciated, Colin.

-- 
Paul W. Frields, RHCE                          http://paul.frields.org/
  gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233  5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717
 Fedora Documentation Project: http://fedora.redhat.com/projects/docs/
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 191 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-advisory-board/attachments/20060419/9261fc01/attachment.sig>