On Aug 8, 2009, at 10:24 AM, Marcus Moeller <m...@marcus-moeller.de> wrote:
> Dear Russ. > >>>> You don't like reputational vetting and a meritocracy, or how >>>> it is run by the people in charge who have as one goal: not >>>> distributing malware. I get it. Thank you. >> >>> Hey Russ, it's open source. You can just review the spec and >>> comment it until it's ready for release. Source could be >>> fetched directly from upstream and patches could be verified >>> easily. >> >> If you want my attention seeking to persuade, do not start a >> communication: 'Hey' as I consider it rude. > > Sorry if I was getting rude and thanks for pointing some things out. > ... > >> You (Marcus) have established yourself as irrelevant to me. >> I will not presently be supporting you for further advancement >> into the CentOS infrastructure if you seek or are proposed for >> such, until I see some 'merit' outside of talking > > ... but I must admit that your above statement is very rude to me. I'm loath to further this thread any more, but like it or not if core developers say it's closed to contributions, it's closed to contributions. I'm happy to make package suggestions on 'devel' in hopes that one developer might see merit in a package and pick it up for 'extras' or 'plus', but if not, then oh well. There is no point in whining about it. This is a small group with a very distinct goal. Provide a equivalent community supported version of a commercial Linux package and that is it. They are not out to create their own spin-off distribution, if you want that try Scientific Linux, but an IP free duplication that projects like Scientific Linux can base off of. -Ross _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
