Not one for all
David, Please don't mistake the proposal of one or two people for something that is generally accepted as the "way" for Fedora. If you read most of the kernel-libre threads, you'll find that there are very few people that actually agree with the suggested implementation of a kernel-libre package, and instead prefer it to be done in a way that won't cripple user's machines and is contained within the kernel proper.
It's sort of important as Fedora continues to grow to remember that a vocal few do not speak for all of Fedora. I generally agree that many of the Free Software purists I've read from come across as... passionate. And I also agree that at times their positions are entirely counter-productive and not pragmatic at all. However I try to ignore the propaganda and focus on the end goal they are trying to achieve. Many times they are willing to compromise to a degree as long as the end goal is the same. Other times they are not.
The cool thing about Fedora is that we have so many different views on aspects such as that, but at the core there seems to be a commonality in believing that Open Source software (I avoid the use of the word Free here on purpose) is the right solution in the end. I hope that as we grow as a community, we continue to keep that in mind. It's the only way we'll continue to be productive.
As for the zealots, and there are some on all sides, I find that if you smile and nod they tend to think they've brainwashed you enough to leave you alone. :)
Note: I realize I only focused on the kernel-libre part of David's post, but that's simply because I didn't follow the Codina issue personally.
![[info]](http://p-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small}
jwboyer) wrote,
