[WBEL-users] I don't want a community

[Jesse]

On Fri, 19 Nov 2004, Bob Ramstad wrote:

> I guess what I'm driving at is that I like the status quo.  More
> frequent updates, created by a wider range of people, is exactly what
> I do NOT want.

While there are always some exceptions, I think most people want the 
"status quo" too, meaning exactly what RHEL provides, minus the license 
encumbrance.

RHEL already provides few, periodic point releases. The only immediate 
updates are security or severe bug fixes. I think it's the desire for 
"community" in WBEL by most is not to have more recent and alternative 
versions of packages, but rather to get the packages RHEL provides on a 
more timely basis.

So really it becomes that people want what WBEL is already, but done 
faster. So they do the only thing they can do to try to fix the problem 
at the source: offer their support. That's the "community".

Unfortunately, John doesn't seem to have time to keep up on his own, and 
doesn't seem interested in automating the process any more, or having 
assistance from anyone outside the library (even a limited, trusted set of 
volunteers). More frustrating has been the relative silence from the 
library on the issue. I can understand them not wanting to get engaged in 
debates all the time, but a simple policy declaration that can be referred 
to would be helpful.

But that's just how it is, and rehashing debates on the list about what 
John should or shouldn't do won't change anything.

I like WBEL, and would like it with faster replication of RHEL updates in 
the official tree. Unfortunately that doesn't seem possible. Luckily in 
the meantime I can rebuild RHEL's security updates on my own for my own 
usage. This unfortunately reduces the usefuless of WBEL, but it's the 
best compromise for me at this time.

---
Jesse <j@lumiere.net>