What's perplexing about them? Mageia was formed to escape from the politics and financial woes that plagued Mandriva. It has taken a lot of time and effort to get to where Mageia currently stands, and I can well understand that people don't want to get dragged back into that.
The people who started Mageia took a big leap and made it safely to the other side. Should they now jump back and try once more to get where they already are?
Furthermore, I fail to see what is in it for Mageia. There is no incentive for Mageia to get involved in this. If both communities operate as they state they (intend to) operate, nothing prohibits anyone from collaborating in the best interest of both distributions.
>Clearly the first two indicate that the project thought Mandriva SA should simply adopt Mageia as its community distribution as-is. That would offer technical challenges, since the two projects have diverged in key areas since the original split (package managers, for example), as well as trademark issues.
>The company's server offering, however, will be based on Mageia.
Perhaps it's just me, but the author of this article seems to contradict himself here. First he calls it perplexing that it is suggested to use Mageia's RPM offering for the new Mandriva, but is the reverse situation (as hinted at in the first quote) any less perplexing? And when it comes to mentioning the server distribution to be based on Mageia, it is completely ignored as being a potential issue.
Cooperation is fine and welcomed. Suggesting that it now is Mageia that should make up with Mandriva and invest time and energy into that, is what seems most perplexing to me.