Maintainer Responsibilities

[Ralf Corsepius]

Nils Philippsen wrote:
> On Thu, 2009-06-04 at 08:54 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
>> Conrad Meyer wrote:
>>> On Wednesday 03 June 2009 11:40:42 pm Ralf Corsepius wrote:
>>>> Conrad Meyer wrote:
>>>>> On Wednesday 03 June 2009 10:23:05 pm Ralf Corsepius wrote:
>>>>>> Let me try an analogy: How do you handle defects/malfunctions with your
>>>>>> car?
>>>>> Did a bunch of hobbyists from around the world build your car by
>>>>> communicating over the internet?
>>>> Have you ever seen an open source car?
>>>>
>>>> The Fedora "car" manufacturer is the "fedora community", assembling it
>>>> from "upstream" components.
>>>>
>>>> Ralf
>>> That's the idea, opensource behaves completely different from a car 
>>> manufacturer.
>> Wrong. It doesn't.
> 
> I don't think we have the power to (nor would we want to) force upstream
> to do certain things in a certain way, for ridiculously low prices and
> "no we won't pay you on delivery" but 3 months later. The relationship
> between us and upstream is significantly different from a car
> manufacturer and its suppliers.

I am talking about "customer"<->"manufacturer" and 
"manufacturer"<->"component supplier" relations.

Wrt. this the relations are not any different:
* manufacturer buys parts at supplier.
... Fedora "buys-in parts from upstreams".
* in case of problems. customer contacts "point of sale" (garage/car 
dealer), point of sale processes request
... Fedora users contact Fedora/RH BZ, ...

What Kevin proposes is equal to demanding car drivers to
a) First identify the defective component
b) Then to identify and contact the component's supplier

This procedure is ridiculous.

Ralf