<br><br> <div><span class="gmail_quote">On 4/6/06, <b class="gmail_sendername">Daniel Robitaille</b> <<a href="mailto:robitaille@gmail.com">robitaille@gmail.com</a>> wrote:</span></div> <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="PADDING-LEFT: 1ex; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; BORDER-LEFT: #ccc 1px solid">"Red Hat gives up on Fedora Foundation"<br><a href="http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060406-6535.html"> http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060406-6535.html</a></blockquote> <div> </div> <div> </div> <div>Great article.</div> <div> </div> <div>"Dominated by Red Hat, the Fedora Project Board will now have complete authority over the Fedora project, including budgetary control. "</div> <div> </div> <div>There is no Cabal.</div> <div> </div> <div>There is not really the same comparison between software vendors like Red Hat or Suse and Ubuntu/Canonical.  Canonical want to make money from launchpad, not Ubuntu.  Red Hat and Novel want to make money from their distributions. </div> <div> </div> <div>That's an important distinction since it better defines what is "the product."  It distiguishes between the software and the services and support.  </div> <div> </div> <div>I beleive the plan for Ubuntu was to seed the community council with Canonical employees to establish the community and then offload those tasks to non-Canonical employees.  I have not heard otherwise, so I guess we are still on that track. </div> <div> </div> <div>It's looking like Ubuntu will be the only major linux distribution with truly community-centric governance.  Since you don't have to be intimately linked to a specific corporate entity to benefit from their contribution to the project, you can get the best of both worlds.  Likewise, users don't feel like they have to pay for free software. </div> <div> </div> <div>My guess it that will really work out well for everyone.  I hope.</div> <div> </div> <div>azz</div> <div> </div> <div> </div>