From: Bryan J. Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Virtually 9 times out of 10, when people say Red Hat does > something "different," it actually becomes the > standard approach, or the project itself is heavily developed by > Red Hat employees (or possibly Fedora associates that are > not employees). Heck, a perfect example now is Upstart, > even though Red Hat had no less than three (3) other init > projects that had been going on for years, Fedora 9 > decided that it's best to do what another distro has > moved on, as long as it satisfies most (if not all) of the > requirements.
Just realized that latter statement could be read wrong after the first. What I meant was that in the other 1 out of 10 times, Red Hat is more than willing to admit when someone else has moved on with an approach and it's best to follow what a community member has done, like Canonical-Ubuntu did with Upstart. Just wanted to clarify that before it could be viewed as I was saying that Red Hat was responsible for Upstart. That was not my intent. I meant it was a great example of 1 out of 10. Forking and doing things different from the community is not sustainable. Never has been, never will be, for an open source company. -- Bryan J Smith Professional, Technical Annoyance [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linkedin.com/in/bjsmith ------------------------------------------------------ I'm a PC, but Linux -- Windows: Life Without Firewalls _______________________________________________ lpi-examdev mailing list [email protected] http://list.lpi.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lpi-examdev
