Hi Siddhesh, On Tue, Oct 04, 2022 at 03:10:35PM -0400, Siddhesh Poyarekar via Overseers wrote: > > We do take this proposal, and all other suggestions people make about > > the sourceware infrastructure, seriously, but a lot of details of this > > proposal are still unclear. We are trying to get as much details as > > possible so we can see how this fits into the current sourceware > > roadmap, get a better understanding of the budgetary needs, file > > sourceware infrastructure bugs with those details. All to get a better > > understanding what the real needs are and document the necessary steps > > forward. > > I had in fact missed the websites mention, sorry I overreacted to your > comment. In that case, I don't know if the GNU websites are actually part > of this proposal.
No worries. It seems everybody is somewhat unclear on the details of this proposal. Making it hard for people not to speculate a little. And it seems the scope changed between when various "key stakeholders" were informed, the LF/IT presentation, the Cauldron talk and what eventually got posted. That is why we are trying to collect all details and file sourceware infrastructure bugs to track the various technical needs from a community perspective. But it would be really nice to hear directly from the Linux Foundation and the OpenSSF about what exactly they are proposing, which parts of the proposal are mandatory, which can be mixed and matched, and how they see this working together with Sourceware becoming a Software Freedom Conservancy member project. Cheers, Mark
