Linux Foundation

[Hans Dedecker]

On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 1:02 PM, John Crispin <john at phrozen.org> wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> @Imre: Thanks for the mail, I hope that we will manage to go the final
> steps to resolve this one way or the other
>
> @Zoltan: i agree with what you say, however during that meeting we
> concluded that we will all work with the best intent to remerge. However
> due to the rules and governance system of LEDE we will need to make a
> vote about remerge and rebranding. The 3 remaining OWRT devs were all
> given full commit and voting rights within the LEDE project so that you
> can obviously take part in this vote.
>
> @Felix, David: I fully agree with what you said about LF and the reasons
> given.
>
> @jow: also agree with what you say.
>
> @daniel: as usual spot on, it pretty much sums up the doubt/fear that
> most LEDE devs have
>
> @lede: everyone, its time to say what you think. people have made a
> start now and your opinion is valid and important whether it is pro or con
>
> Maybe we can speed this process up a bit. I get the impression that
> everyone is eager to remerge and that the branding is the actual topic
> that is blocking this. We could simply make 2 votes
>
> 1) do we want to remerge
Yes under the condition that the existing LEDE project rules [1] are
not changed and the LEDE git tree is used as the start point of the
merge

[1] https://lede-project.org/rules
> 2) do we want to rebrand
I'm neutral on this; I see the pro's to use the brand name OpenWRT
like name recognition but at the same time there're contra's like a
non transparent organization linked to the name OpenWRT. Personally I
favour a name which is linked to both OpenWRT and LEDE to make it
clear a new direction has been taken like a more transparent and open
organization and a shift of targeted devices.

Hans
>
>         John
>
> _______________________________________________
> lede-adm mailing list
> lede-adm at lists.infradead.org
> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/lede-adm