Good bye

[Les Mikesell]

Chris Jones wrote:

>>>
>>>> And there is nothing about the hostility to outside software.
>>>>
>>> I don't think it is so much hostility as ambivalence. 
>>
>> OK, if you describe fedora as 'user ambivalent', it at least makes the 
>> need for ubuntu to exist very clear.
> 
> I prefer the original definition which was effectively 'non-OSS, binary 
> kernel blob and alike ambivalent' -

Which, once you understand the need for those items, translates pretty 
clearly to user-hostile.

> You may disagree but many people, 
> and I think Fedora in general, considers this to be good for the user, 
> in the long run.

Yes, I do disagree as I do in other cases where religious beliefs are 
used to justify hostile actions as being 'good' for others.  My own 
belief is that the availability of an 'affordable' system (both in price 
and effort to maintain) is much more important than 'free with 
restrictions', and 'affordable' won't happen unless all parties cooperate.

> Ubuntu takes a different view point on what is good for the user, which 
> seems to match yours better. I personally think we need both view 
> points, and trying to suggest Fedora should become more like Ubuntu is a 
> bad idea which will never happen.

I guess whether you think it's good or bad depends on whether you'd like 
more or fewer people to learn RH style administration vs. the 
debian/ubuntu style.  I have enough time invested in learning RH style 
that I'd prefer not to start over.

-- 
   Les Mikesell
    lesmikesell at gmail.com