tidy up

[Hugo Cisneiros]

Bela Pesics wrote:
>>>Part of the reason there are so many different sites is that most of them are
>>>community sites, not maintained by the Fedora Project.  At the moment, the
>>>two official sites are fedoraproject.org and fedora.redhat.com.
>>
>>And let's be honest about this.
>>
>>Those sites are providing a service that we cannot provide.  They are
>>more valuable to the user community as community run projects.
>>
>>If we ran them or more formally sanctioned them by redirecting from our
>>domain, Fedora could be seen/held responsible for the content of those
>>sites.
> 
> Yes, this is true regarding the sites I mentioned. However I think
> giving away these functionlaties is a mistake. I mean any "community"
> efforts should be left alone and encouraged, but this way fedora does
> not have its official kbase, news, forum, mail archive gateway.
> Ofcourse such subsites should have had to live on contribution. Still
> not too late :-)
> 
> No interest?

IMO, it's ok to give away these functionlaties to the community, since 
Fedora is a community project. By making the sites "official", you will 
add responsability for the official project, and this is not always good.

I think that in the long way, the sites will prove useful and become the 
official one naturally. For this time, the Fedora Project can recommend 
these sites, since it's not present in the official site.

This way everyone will be happy. The guys at the official site will not 
have too much things in hands, and the community sites owners will be 
free to do everything they need and can in their sites. I say this 
because here we had some "conflicts" when trying to unify the sites, 
trying to stabilish who is responsable for what, who "owns" and who "rules".

As everything in the free software world, these sites will naturally 
became standards by the people selecting it :)

-- 
[]'s
Eitch

http://www.devin.com.br/eitch/
"Talk is cheap. Show me the code." - Linus Torvalds