Openness: Apache as a guiding model (was Re: GFS removed??? )

Colin Charles byte at aeon.com.my
Thu Mar 17 19:23:20 UTC 2005


On Thu, 2005-03-17 at 20:12 +0100, Axel Thimm wrote:
> For one I fail to see any connection of the issues at hand (GFS kernel
> modules) with extras, so forcing people to contribute to extras just
> because they want to contribute to FC/RHEL seems to be very wrong.

You mentioned kernel module packaging, and a post was referenced that
was stuck on fedora-maintainers. You complained that this wasn't exactly
a very open way of doing things

Jef mentioned becoming an Extras packager, so that you get on the
fedora-maintainers list. And now you fail to see the connection?

>From the fedora-maintainers listinfo page:
"This is the list for maintainers of packages in Fedora Core and Fedora
Extras. Subscription to this list is contingent on one of these two
criteria."

So, if you get involved with the process, you get on the list.
Otherwise, following the discussion is still possible, thanks to fedora-
maintainers-readonly

Now what's incredibly unfair with getting involved with the process to
contribute to The Fedora Project? No one's forcing you to contribute to
Extras; you just have to meet one of the two criteria

Warmest regards.
-- 
Colin Charles, byte at aeon.com.my
http://www.bytebot.net/
"First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, 
then you win." -- Mohandas Gandhi




More information about the fedora-devel-list mailing list