4 ms·

Maybe you should have mentioned that you work for Red Hat.

by tokai 3y ago

jacquesm 3y ago
Which is where the original proposal originated. https://lwn.net/ml/fedora-devel/CAJqbrbeOZrHvYjvMCc=qGZD_VXBs3-qReeirr+F8t01Eq1sYhw@mail.gmail.com/ https://lwn.net/ml/fedora-devel/CAJqbrbeOZrHvYjvMCc=qGZD_VXB... Really, given that "One of the main goals of metrics collection is to analyze whether Red Hat is achieving its goal to make Fedora Workstation the premier developer platform for cloud software development." is right there in the text it would seem pretty clear to me that the 'Fedora Community' (in sofar as one exists) is just Red Hat in disguise serving its own interests here, and at arms length to see what the response is. Think of it as a trial balloon which will certainly be followed by more clicks of the ratchet.
- rwmj 3y ago
  And that has to do with IBM how exactly?
  - mardifoufs 3y ago
    That's pretty disingenuous. Are we supposed to pretend that IBM bought redhat to do exactly nothing with it? It's not exactly far fetched to assume that redhat's owners influence redhat. We can't prove that every decision is directly coming from IBM but the point is moot. Redhat is IBM.
    - rwmj 3y ago
      I actually work at Red Hat and IBM are very hands off. I'm quite surprised myself in fact, as I predicted that IBM would absorb Red Hat in one way or another. However you believe whatever you want.
      - always2slow 3y ago
        >I actually work at Red Hat and IBM are very hands off. Are you the CEO or within the decision making structure? Otherwise really it just sounds like you just aren't in on the backchannel where these instructions are issued. Oh and inb4 "There is no backchannel!", IBM is subject to Sarbanes–Oxley there's a backchannel.
    - freedomben 3y ago
      > Are we supposed to pretend that IBM bought redhat to do exactly nothing with it? They bought Red Hat because Red Hat was profitable, the stock was going up, sales were in the early stages of a massive swing upward, and IBM was dropping stock price and waning in market power. It's the same playbook they've been using for decades. It seems more far fetched to me to believe that IBM bought Red Hat so they could destroy it.

Maybe you should have mentioned that you work for Red Hat.

by tokai 3y ago

Maybe you should have mentioned that you work for Red Hat.

Which is where the original proposal originated. https://lwn.net/ml/fedora-devel/CAJqbrbeOZrHvYjvMCc=qGZD_VXBs3-qReeirr+F8t01Eq1sYhw@mail.gmail.com/ https://lwn.net/ml/fedora-devel/CAJqbrbeOZrHvYjvMCc=qGZD_VXB... Really, given that "One of the main goals of metrics collection is to analyze whether Red Hat is achieving its goal to make Fedora Workstation the premier developer platform for cloud software development." is right there in the text it would seem pretty clear to me that the 'Fedora Community' (in sofar as one exists) is just Red Hat in disguise serving its own interests here, and at arms length to see what the response is. Think of it as a trial balloon which will certainly be followed by more clicks of the ratchet.

rwmj 3y ago
And that has to do with IBM how exactly?
- mardifoufs 3y ago
  That's pretty disingenuous. Are we supposed to pretend that IBM bought redhat to do exactly nothing with it? It's not exactly far fetched to assume that redhat's owners influence redhat. We can't prove that every decision is directly coming from IBM but the point is moot. Redhat is IBM.
  - rwmj 3y ago
    I actually work at Red Hat and IBM are very hands off. I'm quite surprised myself in fact, as I predicted that IBM would absorb Red Hat in one way or another. However you believe whatever you want.
    - always2slow 3y ago
      >I actually work at Red Hat and IBM are very hands off. Are you the CEO or within the decision making structure? Otherwise really it just sounds like you just aren't in on the backchannel where these instructions are issued. Oh and inb4 "There is no backchannel!", IBM is subject to Sarbanes–Oxley there's a backchannel.
  - freedomben 3y ago
    > Are we supposed to pretend that IBM bought redhat to do exactly nothing with it? They bought Red Hat because Red Hat was profitable, the stock was going up, sales were in the early stages of a massive swing upward, and IBM was dropping stock price and waning in market power. It's the same playbook they've been using for decades. It seems more far fetched to me to believe that IBM bought Red Hat so they could destroy it.