User: Password:
|
|
Subscribe / Log in / New account

Clasen: GNOME 3.7 at the halfway mark

Clasen: GNOME 3.7 at the halfway mark

Posted Jan 26, 2013 17:06 UTC (Sat) by pboddie (guest, #50784)
In reply to: Clasen: GNOME 3.7 at the halfway mark by misc
Parent article: Clasen: GNOME 3.7 at the halfway mark

Self-consistency doesn't come into it here. By noting that people are paid by Red Hat to maintain GNOME 2, it indulges and then demolishes the argument that the existence of paid maintainers must be the factor that determines inclusion in Fedora (subject to argument about the relationship between Fedora and RHEL).

Of course, Red Hat may be eager to stop having to maintain GNOME 2, and the real reason may be that the existence of external paid developers is what really decides whether something is included in any of the company's products - a matter of not having to bear all the load internally - plus the level of enthusiasm for GNOME 3 amongst internal developers compared to that for GNOME 2, but I'd also hope that the users of the company's products might also get some say (other than voting with their feet, of course).


(Log in to post comments)

Clasen: GNOME 3.7 at the halfway mark

Posted Jan 26, 2013 20:49 UTC (Sat) by rahulsundaram (subscriber, #21946) [Link]

It doesn't demolish anything really. Fedora is not a Red Hat product and Red Hat maintains an older version of GNOME 2 than what was included in Fedora when it was replaced by GNOME 3. Red Hat is willing to put in that additional resources to maintain a commercial product but those same resources are not available for Fedora. It isn't about external paid developers as such since majority of the GNOME developers are from Red Hat in the first place but paid development is part of how you evaluate sustainability of the project. Maintaining a older version has a significant cost and that is not the focus of Fedora. All of this should really be obvious I think.

Clasen: GNOME 3.7 at the halfway mark

Posted Jan 29, 2013 17:09 UTC (Tue) by hadrons123 (guest, #72126) [Link]

Fedora is not a Red Hat product

Is it so?

That's an interesting piece of information to know from you.

Clasen: GNOME 3.7 at the halfway mark

Posted Jan 29, 2013 17:56 UTC (Tue) by rahulsundaram (subscriber, #21946) [Link]

If you have ever read the original announcement of Fedora or ever visited the about section in http://fedoraproject.org or heck if you just see the domain name, you would have known this about 8 or so years back.

Clasen: GNOME 3.7 at the halfway mark

Posted Jan 30, 2013 15:14 UTC (Wed) by hadrons123 (guest, #72126) [Link]

I do know that fedora is a red hat sponsored community product, but you are asking us to believe that red hat has no role in what packages gets in and out of fedora, specifically for example cinnamon or systemd. Fedora Cinnamon package review was waiting for more than 6 months citing various reasons and finally it was uploaded. I do appreciate and thank your effort in getting cinnamon in to the official repos, but you have to admit that there was so much hesitation from other people in Fedora camp.

Clasen: GNOME 3.7 at the halfway mark

Posted Jan 30, 2013 15:48 UTC (Wed) by rahulsundaram (subscriber, #21946) [Link]

You have shifted your points but yes, Red Hat has zero role in Cinnamon or systemd getting into Fedora. You don't have to take my word for it. The review process is entirely public.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=771252

It was submitted by a volunteer, Leigh Scott and I took up the review voluntarily.The major opposition came from another volunteer, Christoph Wickert who was concerned about sustainability and violation of packaging guidelines regarding forks and we discussed it with the packaging committee and it was eventually approved by another volunteer, Dan Mashal. The delay was partly my fault since I took up the review and didn't finish it up quickly since I was focusing on release specific tasks at that time and we also had to get the packaging committee approval and the reviews themselves took time.

systemd was submitted by me and approved by another volunteer.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=598299

It became the default after approval by FESCo (a fully elected body btw) which did delay it by one release despite having a number of Red Hat employees in it. So if you are looking for favoritism you have picked the wrong examples. Are there other packages submitted by Red Hat employees as part of the job? yes but the important point is that the process is not designed to be any different regardless of who you work for.


Copyright © 2017, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds