FC3 -> FC4 Upgrade? (was Re: reducing distribution CD count)

[seth vidal]

On Fri, 2005-02-25 at 14:49 -0600, Michael Favia wrote:
>seth vidal wrote:
>
>>Mostly to keep the signal/noise ratio down.
>>  
>>
>Sounds awful elitist and Machiavellian for a community driven project.


It does? Who do I represent? I think I am a member of 'the community'?
I think Jeremy and Bill and Elliot are too.
I think they're members of the contributing community.
It's not elitistism it's based on listening to the people who are doing
the work. In large projects if you listen to everyone you can never get
any work done. So you listen to the people are contributing. I don't
think that's particularly crazy. Show me an open source project that is
NOT like that. This is not a democracy - I hope it's a meritocracy - but
in reality it's something more like 'those people who do the work get
listened to'-ocracy.

Do the work, see how many people listen. They may not agree - but
they'll listen.


>I agree, but then you are just granting the illusion of a community 
>controlled project arent you? Essentially the real discussion concerning 
>dev will have been moved to f-m right? I understand that trying to keep 
>the project moving without all of this "change is bad" and "me too" crap 
>is important but i think that this "fix"  fails to live up to the 
>community aspect of the project doesnt it? Essentially your voice doesnt 
>matter if you arent a maintainer anymore because the other lists will be 
>read less and less by RH and maintainers over time. As a result you will 
>lose the community driven nature i think because all of the opinions 
>batted about will be those of maintainers alone. A moderated white list 
>of users that conduct themselves in a prescribed manner makes most sense 
>to me.
Then tell me how else you do it? How to cull the signal from the noise?

show me a better way and we'll get there lickety-damn-split.

-sv