Re: [gnu.org #25869] eCos as an FSF project?

[Nick Garnett <nickg@ecoscentric.com>]

Jonathan Larmour <jifl@eCosCentric.com> writes:

> 
> I vote to go ahead with Red Hat, but if that fails, drop assignments
> but retain a disclaimer.
> 
> Something else to think about is whether we should plough ahead with
> 2.0 final anyway, or wait till we hear from Red Hat, or at the very
> least wait for some time period for Red Hat. For "just" the
> documentation, they will hopefully be amenable to an accommodation -
> it's not like the FSF are an unknown quantity! Something to consider
> anyway, and it's obvious we can't wait with 2.0 going stale, so I
> suggest a drop dead date, which we wouldn't be real close anyway, as
> there are still some outstanding 2.0 issues.
> 

I don't think we should hold up 2.0 for this issue -- release it when
it's ready on technical grounds.

While I am reluctant to have to go back and interact with Red Hat
again -- mainly because of the delay it will cause. I guess we should
at least try this. I doubt it will come to much though.

If (when!) the Red Hat approach fails then I would vote for dropping
assignments and accepting the consequences.

-- 
Nick Garnett                    eCos Kernel Architect
http://www.ecoscentric.com/     The eCos and RedBoot experts