public inbox for overseers@sourceware.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jim Kingdon <kingdon@redhat.com>
To: rosalia@galassi.org
Cc: overseers@sourceware.cygnus.com, paulb@cygnus.com
Subject: Re: an article that talks about sourcefourge and itanium
Date: Sat, 30 Dec 2000 06:08:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <200005301446.KAA08704@devserv.devel.redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <7666ry6qx0.fsf@odie.lanl.gov>

> There's some interesting stuff in the second half about how Augustine
> thinks that sourceforge helped VA/Linux increase support contract
> revenue.
> 
> http://www.upside.com/Open_Season/392eeb7b0_yahoo.html

Thanks for the link.  At the risk of beating a dead horse, the rest of
this message is about sourceware's funding and such.

I've heard at least one Red Hat customer say they like having their
work being done on sourceware (rather than a Red Hat internal server),
because they can track it better.  And Tiemann also asked me how we
were going with the search for a new "owner".

I think at this point it might be a question of what do we want out of
Red Hat?  (watch out, there is a "careful what you wish for, you might
get it" element to this).  Do we want IS to leave us alone?  Do we
want them to handle everything (and if so can they provide the kind of
service we're looking for)?  Do any of us want to be (full/part time
or consultant) sysadmins?  Do we want to farm out specific tasks to
sysadmin?  Do we want to automate those tasks so they don't need
farming out?

I'm willing to help formulate answers to those questions (for now the
answer has been that we want to muddle through as we have been and let
people contribute on the basis of
make-small-contributions-first-then-get-more-access, and although that
may sound flippant, some thought has gone into it).

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID
From: Jim Kingdon <kingdon@redhat.com>
To: rosalia@galassi.org
Cc: overseers@sourceware.cygnus.com, paulb@cygnus.com
Subject: Re: an article that talks about sourcefourge and itanium
Date: Tue, 30 May 2000 07:46:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <200005301446.KAA08704@devserv.devel.redhat.com> (raw)
Message-ID: <20000530074600.GFum4ryyukomeV7fg9ZQD25Gm2OFvCSHEp6rYWOaous@z> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <7666ry6qx0.fsf@odie.lanl.gov>

> There's some interesting stuff in the second half about how Augustine
> thinks that sourceforge helped VA/Linux increase support contract
> revenue.
> 
> http://www.upside.com/Open_Season/392eeb7b0_yahoo.html

Thanks for the link.  At the risk of beating a dead horse, the rest of
this message is about sourceware's funding and such.

I've heard at least one Red Hat customer say they like having their
work being done on sourceware (rather than a Red Hat internal server),
because they can track it better.  And Tiemann also asked me how we
were going with the search for a new "owner".

I think at this point it might be a question of what do we want out of
Red Hat?  (watch out, there is a "careful what you wish for, you might
get it" element to this).  Do we want IS to leave us alone?  Do we
want them to handle everything (and if so can they provide the kind of
service we're looking for)?  Do any of us want to be (full/part time
or consultant) sysadmins?  Do we want to farm out specific tasks to
sysadmin?  Do we want to automate those tasks so they don't need
farming out?

I'm willing to help formulate answers to those questions (for now the
answer has been that we want to muddle through as we have been and let
people contribute on the basis of
make-small-contributions-first-then-get-more-access, and although that
may sound flippant, some thought has gone into it).

  parent reply	other threads:[~2000-12-30  6:08 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2000-12-30  6:08 Mark Galassi
2000-05-28 19:17 ` Mark Galassi
2000-12-30  6:08 ` Jim Kingdon [this message]
2000-05-30  7:46   ` Jim Kingdon
2000-12-30  6:08   ` Jeffrey A Law
2000-05-30  8:05     ` Jeffrey A Law
2000-12-30  6:08   ` Tom Tromey
2000-05-30  8:34     ` Tom Tromey

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=200005301446.KAA08704@devserv.devel.redhat.com \
    --to=kingdon@redhat.com \
    --cc=overseers@sourceware.cygnus.com \
    --cc=paulb@cygnus.com \
    --cc=rosalia@galassi.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).