-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Monday 10 February 2003 09:24 pm, CyberCFO wrote: > On Monday 10 February 2003 05:51 pm, you wrote: > > CyberCFO wrote: > > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > > > Hash: SHA1 > > > > > > First off, I do not represent Mandrake or MandrakeSoft in any way other > > > than as a user. I have been following the thread you have reported on > > > in the Cooker ML and would like to make a few observations and > > > suggestions. > > > > I hope this fits better. > > > > Mandrake Linux without MandrakeSoft? Some Mandrake developers are > > [37]discussing the future of Mandrake Linux since Ben Reser > > [38]believes that he end of [39]MandrakeSoft is [40]inevitable. They > > [41]proposed to organise Mandrake Linux development as community > > effort and [42]investigated how the Debian project is organised, which > > is why John Goerzen from Debian [43]contributes to the discussion. > > Gustavo Franco, for example, [44]proposed Mandrake as a new project > > inside Debian under the umbrella of Software in the Public Interest, > > Inc. However, this idea was refused. > > > > 37. http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg90098.html > > 38. http://archives.mandrakelinux.com/cooker/2003-01/msg03850.php > > 39. http://www.mandrakesoft.com/ > > 40. > > http://ben.reser.org/rants/invisible.cgi?month=01&day=15&year=2003&t=00 > > 41. http://archives.mandrakelinux.com/cooker/2003-01/msg04630.php 42. > > http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg90243.html 43. > > http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg90522.html 44. > > http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg90668.html > > > > Regards, > > > > Joey > > You have missed my point, and the point of the original discussion. You > have again mischaracterized the thread as a discussion of planning life > after MandrakeSoft when in fact they were planning life with MandrakeSoft, > only a more open and friendly development process. The discussion that > referenced Debian was to try and glean ways that the MandrakeSoft > development process could be more inclusive and easier to join. > > Your people (John and Gustavo) turned it into the discussion it became by > trolling the list, and now you are reporting on it as if a spontaneous > discussion about Mandrake joining up with Debian was had by the > MandrakeSoft developers. I believe that their original intention for > joining the discussion was noble, they ultimately had their discussion with > people that did not represent MandrakeSoft per se. > > You also further insinuate that the Mandrake community is planning for the > demise of MandrakeSoft, which it was not. Some in the community, Ben Reser > for example, may think that is true, but many do not, and Ben Reser > certainly does not speak for MandrakeSoft, and he did not even participate > in the discussion. His post from 1-28-2003 that you reference was on a > thread completely unrelated to the discussion in question. > > You have it wrong, but I don't suppose that matters to you. I guess the > real version does not make for a very good headline. I am copying the > cooker list on this response and I suppose I should also add in a Debian > list or two, but I'll deal with that if this actually gets published.
I really should clarify what this is. I took up Gustavo's suggestion to contact Joey about the mischaracterizations in his article in the Debian Weekly News (dwn) about the thread over the weekend that was kicked off by Warly to discuss how MandrakeSoft development process could be more inclusive. He took a shot at rewriting the article, and in my estimation made no change in the way he is characterizing the thread. This is my second correspondence with him attempting to get him to realize the true nature of the original thread. I thought all of you that followed that thread would find this interesting. - -- /g -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE+SHve+ws/iCKP4iERAvBrAKCUSxZedd1t/INaCwyqbE3QyvdkeACggptC c1klrHPjUEG/f8qHaRI+FEE= =nX87 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
