| 1 |
Caleb Tennis (caleb@g.o) scribbled: |
| 2 |
> Hi Kurt, |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> This is an awesome GLEP idea, and I'm glad it finally got put into written |
| 5 |
> words. The one suggestion I have, which I am sure is up for a large amount |
| 6 |
> of criticism, is that I think Gentoo should charge a fee for the use of this |
| 7 |
> tree. This is, in my opinion, a premium service, and a I believe it should |
| 8 |
> come with a premium price, even if it's as low as 5 dollars per quarter. |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> But maybe I'm totally off base here. |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
While not a Gentoo dev, my primary job is as a linux developer in an |
| 14 |
engineering house. I have Gentoo running on all three servers/projects, |
| 15 |
and am totally happy with it. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
I think the idea of a stable tree is outstanding. However, the idea of |
| 18 |
charging is not so good. My reasoning is such, if a manager is being |
| 19 |
charged for something, the first thing they will want to know is "who do |
| 20 |
we call when (or if :) ) it craps out?" |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
Unless Gentoo is prepared to provide official support, as RedHat does, |
| 23 |
I think they should avoid charging access fees. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
A fee for the quarterly released 'stable' CD? excellent. But a fee for |
| 26 |
'membership' to access the stable tree would invite more problems than |
| 27 |
it solves. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
And as everyone else is saying, no desire to flame or be flamebait. |
| 30 |
Just want to add my 2 cents. |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
Cooper. |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
-- |
| 35 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives