I'm most disappointed with the silence from Karanbir and friends. Obviously their Red Hat salary is more important to them than keeping CentOS the way it was. :-( -- Yves Bellefeuille <yan at storm.ca> GPG key 837A6134 at http://members.storm.ca/~yan/pgp.asc
On Fri, Dec 11, 2020 at 09:51:05PM -0500, Yves Bellefeuille wrote:> I'm most disappointed with the silence from Karanbir and friends. > Obviously their Red Hat salary is more important to them than keeping > CentOS the way it was. :-(Yes, far be it from people to worry about putting food on their children's table during a pandemic. Your mistake, along with that of many, is thinking the Board had a choice in any of this. So what, exactly, do you expect Singh or others to say? What, if anything, could they say that would make you feel better about this? John -- <@rattle> I am fully confident that the cisco feature train is maintained by a schizophrenic sadist. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 198 bytes Desc: not available URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20201211/7c91bad5/attachment-0003.sig>
"John R. Dennison" <jrd at gerdesas.com> wrote:> Yes, far be it from people to worry about putting food on their > children's table during a pandemic.Oh, please. Nobody suggested this has anything to do with the pandemic; nobody even mentioned the pandemic, except you. -- Yves Bellefeuille <yan at storm.ca>
> I'm most disappointed with the silence from Karanbir and friends. > Obviously their Red Hat salary is more important to them than keeping > CentOS the way it was. :-(I'm sure they will speak out once they are in position to do so. That's obviously not now and nobody should blame them for it. They deserve better! Simon
On 12/11/20 9:51 PM, Yves Bellefeuille wrote:> I'm most disappointed with the silence from Karanbir and friends. > Obviously their Red Hat salary is more important to them than keeping > CentOS the way it was. :-(This boggles the mind.? OF COURSE their salary should realistically be more important to them than keeping CentOS the way it was; how strong of a disagreement with your employer is your salary worth? However, reading between the lines, with Red Hat's internal developers directly working with CentOS Stream beginning 1Q 2021, and CentOS 7 ending support in 2024, I have to wonder a little what the long-term employment of those building CentOS looks like, specifically post-CentOS 7 EOL.? Of course, it's not really any of my business, to be honest, but the CentOS developers are all very bright and highly skilled, so they are very employable, whether at Red Hat or elsewhere. Given what's already been posted to the lists, it seems to me that the CentOS Board was able to obtain some concessions; I will likely never know what those were, nor is it really any of my business what they were, but I thank the CentOS Board for doing what they could. And I thank all those who have built and continue to build CentOS; I've had a relatively small exposure to what building and distributing packages is like, a few years back (well, 1999 to 2004), and user-entitlement-syndrome is part of the reason I won't do that any more (my wife's health was the primary reason I stopped, though; priorities are priorities!).