Fedora Respins

[Rahul Sundaram]

Hi

>See my previous private response on this one.
>
>As mentioned I only recieved one mail from you, and it was rather
>unclear about your intentions. Seeing as it looked a lot like the
>other "Thanks" and "you should do this" mail I dismissed it as that.
>If there were more I cannot see that I have received any.
>  
>
I did send subsequent mails with even more details. You seem to have 
missed out on them. Please accept my apologies if my messages came off 
as something that was not intended. I send hundreds of mails over a day 
and I might have been curt on occasions.

>I myself tried to contact redhat people on a few occations, but never
>got any responses either. I guessed redhat is a big organization and
>had no time for little me.
>  
>
Can I put it right back to you. I send a mail and I didnt a response 
either. Does that mean that little you ignored big Red Hat ;-)  Which 
people did you contact about this within Red Hat. If you can give names, 
I will talk to them and see if they really got a mail. Your mails might 
have been lost in the MX issue we had with spams earlier on @redhat.com ids.

>What really irritated me was that the installer problems never saw
>any updates in FC4. What I mean is that anaconda never got fixed.
>I got several mail telling me to "atleast fix the anaconda problems"
>but due to legalese I did not dare to deviate from the standard
>FC4/FC4-updates packages.
>  
>
What legalese? As long as you dont call it a formal Fedora release you 
can deviate as much as you want. If you want to see this effort happen 
within the Fedora Project. see below

>The two most prominent problems that also exist in FC4.2:
>1. Swap label garbage
>2. Installer cd won't boot unless you feed it garbage.
>
>Inquires about whether the kernel sitting in updates-testing for weeks
>will get released within the next few week or so went unanswered.
>  
>
Whom did you ask?  Might have been lost in list noise

>Fixing anaconda sounds to me like a community benefit.
>I assume it was not fixed because RH and FC4 itself didn't need it.
>  
>
Most likely because RH was focusing its effort on driving ahead within 
its finite resources. Respin efforts and Fedora Legacy project is how 
the community can help and has helped here. Fedora Legacy is now a 
official project within the Fedora Foundation. You can send a proposal 
to the Fedora Foundation - directors AT fedorafoundation.org  and copy 
me the mail so that I can follow up on this and get this done as formal 
project too. I see that you have legal concerns and liability issues. We 
can help sort that out. Do provide us a list of requirements and 
concerns while sending a proposal if you want to work on this within the 
community perhaps as a team then and lets see what we can do to address 
this in the right way.

>What *I* read was several thanks from *redhat.com ppls that seemed to
>be from the persons, not company. IE: I didn't see them as official.
>  
>
True but we did send messages welcoming you. If you had wanted to get an 
official response and atleast responded to me, I would have been able to 
help you. Not blaming anyone. Just clarifying some misconceptions 
involved. 

-- 
Rahul 

Fedora Bug Triaging - http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers