Re: Feedback on secondary architecture promotion requirements draft
On 04/03/2012 09:23 PM, Josh Boyer wrote:
The need for a full warranty is usually enough of a hurdle to limit what the community as a bunch of individuals can do. Your idea of a community started funding account is new though I think. It might be worth exploring.
Arguably we ( as a community ) should be striving to become as independent of Red Hat as possible so it strikes me as a bit odd that we cant by some means fund the project either by donating ourselves or by getting other corporate sponsorship.
I think it's inevitable that there will be conflicts of interest with Red Hat and just to give you an recent example Red Hat has stated that it is not willing to put effort or resources into a Fedora LTS distribution.
Which means for example we ( as an community ) might need to fund and setup our own infrastructure to host an Fedora LTS release efforts for the project and it kinda goes with out saying that we need a way to fund such efforts.
On and on it should be sufficient for the project I suppose to have an community wiki page wish list with donate link(s) for various stuff like server hw,camera's to be used to record sessions at various events for those community members that are unable to attend, even sponsor people to attend for that matter or any other ideas/stuff that might need funding.
Somehow other distro's have manage to find a way to fund themselves perhaps we can adopt some of their model and implement it either officially or unofficially...
JBG -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel