AWX modernization: Ansible Jewel

[jon-nfc (Jon)]

@oranod

Thanks for taking the time to write all this up. To be honest with you, though, I feel like there’s a bit of hyperbole that undermines your overall position.

where you use and abuse the developers from the community

All whilst not providing back to the same community “you claim” to be part of

Red Hat does, in fact, provide back to the Ansible community in a variety of ways. Sponsoring conferences, facilitating meetups, funding for infrastructure are just some of the examples off the top of my head. I get that you might not like one response but it’s a bit of a stretch to think that represents the whole.

“hyperbole”… You have missed the whole point of my post and the pain points the “Open Source Community,” the only community in my contentious posts. The fact you have used the “Ansible Community” in the counter to my post is a demonstration of said missed point. All you have done is stood on the highest building and “screamed to the world” “look at the good I’m doing.” All of this whilst failing to meet the social contract of being a member of “Open Source” community.

@oranod

This is just my 2c but it seems kind of backwards to give “official” builds to community users. If you want “free AAP” you can always grab a developer subscription. Not being snarky about that and I hope it doesn’t come across that way. I genuinely think it would be a bit of a disservice to community users to get builds of a thing that is tailored for a different audience. Know what I mean?

Backwards? You are clearly thinking about this wrong, why?..

• Jewel is the software in question

• Jewel has an open source licence

• Jewel is currently only code…

• red had is not providing documentation, build artifacts or releases for Jewel

• red hat wants “Open Source” Community developers to help develop Jewel

• Jewel can not be used by a majority of the “Open Source” Community

• red hat wants the benefit “Open Source developers assisting with the software” whithout the resposibilites “Not providing a means for a majority of the Open Source Community to use said software”

As such red hat is not inline with the core principles of Open Source software. This “breech” of the social contract is common amongst red hats repositories.

If you want “free AAP” you can always grab a developer subscription.

Really! Antagonistic much! How so I hear you ask? red hat “Open Sourced” the products that make up AAP and now you winge that I can get it for free. (I don’t know if you know it or not, that’s how Open Source software works.) Welcome to Open Source Software.

Not being snarky about that and I hope it doesn’t come across that way.

Snarky or not, red hat can’t have its cake and eat it too. Be an Open Source software company or be a closed source software company. Right now this is clearly a case of red hat “protecting the bottom line.” All whilst claiming to be an “Open Source” company. A company I might add, that publicly likes to flout it’s “Open Source” nature without actually fulfilling their responsibilities.