[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: Maintainer Responsibilities



Nils Philippsen wrote:
On Thu, 2009-06-04 at 08:54 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
Conrad Meyer wrote:
On Wednesday 03 June 2009 11:40:42 pm Ralf Corsepius wrote:
Conrad Meyer wrote:
On Wednesday 03 June 2009 10:23:05 pm Ralf Corsepius wrote:
Let me try an analogy: How do you handle defects/malfunctions with your
car?
Did a bunch of hobbyists from around the world build your car by
communicating over the internet?
Have you ever seen an open source car?

The Fedora "car" manufacturer is the "fedora community", assembling it
from "upstream" components.

Ralf
That's the idea, opensource behaves completely different from a car manufacturer.
Wrong. It doesn't.

I don't think we have the power to (nor would we want to) force upstream
to do certain things in a certain way, for ridiculously low prices and
"no we won't pay you on delivery" but 3 months later. The relationship
between us and upstream is significantly different from a car
manufacturer and its suppliers.

I am talking about "customer"<->"manufacturer" and "manufacturer"<->"component supplier" relations.

Wrt. this the relations are not any different:
* manufacturer buys parts at supplier.
... Fedora "buys-in parts from upstreams".
* in case of problems. customer contacts "point of sale" (garage/car dealer), point of sale processes request
... Fedora users contact Fedora/RH BZ, ...

What Kevin proposes is equal to demanding car drivers to
a) First identify the defective component
b) Then to identify and contact the component's supplier

This procedure is ridiculous.

Ralf




[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]