Hi Stephan, all, Stephan Ficht wrote: > Questions just to delay the matter more and more? > At least that's the impression I get. > No. There was always support for getting devs hired. You've received personal statements from me that this is not a delay tactic.
> After an incredible period of 9(!) months, an incredible amount of around
> 15-20(!) versions of the 14(!) pages 'Proposal of TDF In-House-Developers'
> and incredible efforts from especially Kendy and Paolo (big thanks to both
> of you!) it seems to me that some want to restart the process ('stop here
> and restart, from a clean state'; 're-evaluate', ...).
> For what reason? Because of one sentence? Incredible!
>
This is unfortunately the situation, yes. Sometimes, one sentence can
make a whole lot of a difference - just imagine we would remove the
first sentence from our statutes: "The objective of the foundation is
the promotion and development of office software available for use by
anyone free of charge."
This is not to say any board decision will require the fought-over
sentence, just that the proposal now up for voting is not balanced
without it.
Like the next guy, I'm not eager to fight over 14 pages of rather
verbose text for another 9 months. Thus the suggestion to start from a
clean slate.
> Furthermore, I think that a good relationship with everyone is
> valuable and helpful for all parts of the community and for the
> common projects.
>
I fully support that notion. That indeed though includes all parts
of our community, several of them are on record of being rather very
unhappy with the proposal in its current state.
All the best,
-- Thorsten
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
