You are wildly wrong. Szulik just said it, and as a former insider, I can vouch for it, too: Virtually all of Red Hat's employees work on Fedora, and that's not going to change. They do not want to ditch Fedora. They want to use it better.
Make no mistake. They want to use Fedora to
* Remain attractive to enthusiasts and other non-enterprise users
* Enlist outside resources to help improve something that ultimately becomes RHEL
* Sell more RHEL
The advantage of their approach is the potential for the mutual benefit of the enthusiast and the enterprise participants. With a virtuous cycle like that, it may actually "sell more RHEL".
(If you make sure to wear your tin-foil hat, it'll be easier for us to steer clear of you.)
It's worth noting that, while all of what you want may not be present on the first CD, Fedora does not require you to download all 4 CDs. You only need the first 2 CDs to install the "personal desktop" profile, and then you can get whatever else you'd like via yum.
The claim of the "open source Java" group is that it benefits both Sun and libre software. I think we know why it's good for free software people, but why is it good for Sun? Adoption.
Ask yourself:
Would C++ have become the success it has been if:
1. You had to have a license from Sun to implement parts of it.
2. Sun had a big competitor, a Microsoft, with a similar but different "C++".
Without declaring it a mistake, we can at least say that not open sourcing Java is a big gamble, because item 1 means Sun doesn't have our considerable help and 2 means Sun needs it bad.
We have to conclude that Sun doesn't think it needs help. IMO, they desperately do.
Slashdot Mirror
You are wildly wrong. Szulik just said it, and as a former insider, I can vouch for it, too: Virtually all of Red Hat's employees work on Fedora, and that's not going to change. They do not want to ditch Fedora. They want to use it better.
Make no mistake. They want to use Fedora to
* Remain attractive to enthusiasts and other non-enterprise users
* Enlist outside resources to help improve something that ultimately becomes RHEL
* Sell more RHEL
The advantage of their approach is the potential for the mutual benefit of the enthusiast and the enterprise participants. With a virtuous cycle like that, it may actually "sell more RHEL".
(If you make sure to wear your tin-foil hat, it'll be easier for us to steer clear of you.)
It's worth noting that, while all of what you want may not be present on the first CD, Fedora does not require you to download all 4 CDs. You only need the first 2 CDs to install the "personal desktop" profile, and then you can get whatever else you'd like via yum.
And a 2.6 kernel has been yum and apt-get installable on FC1 for some time as well. Y'all are silly.
The claim of the "open source Java" group is that it benefits both Sun and libre software. I think we know why it's good for free software people, but why is it good for Sun? Adoption.
Ask yourself:
Would C++ have become the success it has been if:
1. You had to have a license from Sun to implement parts of it.
2. Sun had a big competitor, a Microsoft, with a similar but different "C++".
Without declaring it a mistake, we can at least say that not open sourcing Java is a big gamble, because item 1 means Sun doesn't have our considerable help and 2 means Sun needs it bad.
We have to conclude that Sun doesn't think it needs help. IMO, they desperately do.
For US residents:
If you'd like NASA to reconsider, http://savethehubble.org is carrying a petition to uncancel the servicing mission.
You might also consider sending a message to your representative. The house.gov website makes it easy.