Louis Suarez-Potts wrote:
I rather think that if one wishes to work within the boundaries of the MP (or any) project one must ensure that one's efforts are in agreement with the project's goals. Asking the MP leads is not such a bureaucratic step, I think. What we all do not want is losing the message (or confusing it) or duplication of effort.
It depends on what you mean by "asking". If every step requires approval, and approval is almost impossible to obtain because you get wrapped up in endless discussion, then I think that's very bad. On the other hand, if you mean asking if anyone is currently working on a project like that, then absolutely.
So, once again, we go back to balance. There has to be flexibility for people to take their own initiative, not require permission for everything. On the other hand, there has to be communication, and we should avoid duplicating an existing initiative.
For the reasons I stated, I suggested that Frando had done alright with that balance. You know, it's not like he just made the website without anyone hearing about it. SpreadOpenoffice.org has been in discussion for eons. I think we're definitely at (and past) the point where we can start seeing some action. And again, Frando still communicated with the community, and is /currently/ in discussion (with Robert primarily).
(That duplication and failure to check can cost us. You recall how Sam went ahead and arbitrarily signed us up for Linux World Boston? You applauded the move,
I applaud the move. Taking an intiative is very important. At the time I said that if he wants to do it, and can get people for it, he should go ahead. I stand by that. We definitely need more initiative.
Thanks for the summary. But the ultimate arbiters are of course the MP leads.
... if this is to be done as part of the MP project.
Cheers, Daniel.
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
