staticlifetime

Added. Thanks.

If some people were ill-informed and spreading that nonsense, that is on them. Not saying you are outright wrong, but I personally never saw any folks trying to make the argument. My recollection is that everyone knew this request came from Red Hat, and you could definitely easily see who submitted the proposal the entire time.

It's amazing that even though it's clear there was no steamrolling of this, you are still pissed that it was simply proposed.

We have enough real drama in the Linux community, we don't need manufactured stuff like this.

Thanks for the heads-up! It's not meant to be a list of official communities. Just a list of magazines that exist. Nothing stopping kbin users from wanting to use it, and do their own thing locally.

No, I don't just believe. I posted what was said. Do you just believe anything the opposite? Did you want to peruse through other MRs?

Want to address the other comment about why it requires more bandwidth to merge in CentOS Stream than upstream?

Let me get this straight. You're bitching because the community voted against it, so in response they're rewriting the proposal to better align with community feedback? Man, I swear, there are some whiny assholes abound right now.

Everyone knows that the initial request WAS FROM RED HAT! There is no bombshell here. What is with all of this dramatic flair?

Looks like they have responded a bit more positively with better explanation as to why it wasn't being approved in CentOS Stream directly. It does look like it's being done upstream in Fedora Linux, and it's about bandwidth in testing for quality, etc. than it is simply being mean-spirited.

RHEL product manager claims that this is even what happens when another Red Hat engineer submits a merge request too.

I am not familiar with this particular sort of situation, but it may simply be a bug. I would search the Bugzilla and related upstream projects repos for issues possibly related. If you don't find anything, you may even be useful by submitting a bug report, and see how that goes.

No, I mean Red Hat engineers. Despite being a wholly-owned subsidiary of IBM, they are separate orgs. This probably doesn't mean anything to you, because you are mad at Red Hat, but that doesn't mean that the decisions made were done by IBM's executives, and most IBM engineers probably aren't running Fedora Linux.

Fedora is just flat-out king for desktop IMO. It has packages that are new, but not unstable. Lots of Red Hat engineers use it as a daily driver, so fixes come quick, and it has a pretty large user base. It's made for this stuff.

I'm guessing you have updated entirely, and you on version 38? Did it ever work for you prior?

Right. This is the only right answer when it comes to a compromise between developers and users.

He makes a good point about Amazon too. They rebased from RHEL to Fedora for a reason. They're not going to risk all the effort if they thought it was on some shaky ground like people make it out to be. There's a LOT of FUD out there right now. Unfortunately, Red Hat hasn't been doing itself a lot of favors with the way they've handled stuff lately, and I think they need to do some serious PR efforts.