Re: Way forward with FSF

[Jonathan Larmour <jifl@eCosCentric.com>]

Gary Thomas wrote:
> Since there doesn't seem to be any timetable for the FSF to move, I think
> it behooves us to go ahead with this plan(*).  I am OK with eCosCentric being
> the center point (I'm like Andrew and don't have the inclination or resources
> to take this on).

Great. I'll give Mark a little more time to chime in, but otherwise it 
looks pretty promising.

> (*) Right now, I think the community thinks of this as a major stumble and
> that our current approach of waiting for the FSF is growing stale.  At least
> this way, it'll look like we are interested in the integrity of the codebase
> while still accepting new work (and the RH assignment is surely an impediment
> for some contributors).  When this is announced, it must be made very clear
> that it is an interim solution, chosen only to keep the project/codebase
> alive while waiting for the FSF.

Absolutely. And the instant the FSF wakes up and we reach agreement, 
everything would get transferred, no delays, ifs or buts.

Jifl
-- 
eCosCentric    http://www.eCosCentric.com/    The eCos and RedBoot experts
--["No sense being pessimistic, it wouldn't work anyway"]-- Opinions==mine