Dimi Paun wrote:
folks involved in highly visible projects. The oppinions of these guys matter in those projects. I would like RHAT to listen to their customers (like any decent company), and push for changes that they consider worthwhile where they can. And this can be done in a lot of places, especially in difficult to talk to projects like GNOME. This _is_ a development related issue, and I think it is very much on topic for this list. We were told Fedora is essential part of RHAT model, which was pretty clear from the beginning. That's fine. I have
Well one doesn't have to go there, since many packages in Fedora are in RHEL and Desktop, so Redhat are already 'on the side of the user' in the sense of being commercially motivated to get those shared packages in a great state. For the evolution case or whatever it doesn't even need mentioning if it must be renovated for Fedora or for RHEL, we can see RHAT's will to do something in a good direction on it and that will be there for us in both cases. But it's true for most specific bugs that it's the user who is suffering it on his machine that is the #1 motivated person in the whole scheme of things to see that particular bug fixed.
used RHAT since 4.0, and I'm glad to see RHAT acknowladge this fact. However, this comes with some responsabilities, and one of it is listening to customer feedback (within limits, of course). Is RHAT willing to do that?
Over on fedora-list there have been many many claims on RHAT to listen to customers/feedback/demands/complaints and so on, some of them pretty unfair and senseless, and I have come to shrink away from doing it myself and instead appreciate what they actually do for us. RHAT don't really have responsibilities to us as users at all since they give us all this work without strings except the mostly inherited licensing. To some extent this assumption that they must listen to their 'customers' (at least, the ones who pay them no money) is another thoughtpattern like 'marketing' that comes over from the commercial software world and is a poor fit for Free software.
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature