Marco, Le Wed, 20 Oct 2010 05:46:22 +0200, "M. Fioretti" <[email protected]> a écrit :
> On Mon, Oct 18, 2010 13:27:55 PM +0200, Charles-H. Schulz > ([email protected]) wrote: > > > "M. Fioretti" <[email protected]> a écrit : > > > > > On Mon, Oct 18, 2010 12:00:56 PM +0200, Charles-H. Schulz > > > ([email protected]) wrote: > > > > > > > On the other hand, I and others do not tolerate being "fired" by > > > > Oracle. Resigning is one thing, being kicked out is another one. > > > > Resigning is a logical consequence of our actions that will > > > > actually happen soon, being kicked out and accepting it means > > > > we acknowledge that Oracle has the right of life and death over > > > > the OOo community. Good thing we went to open the Document > > > > Foundation then! > > > > > > ... > > > You wanted since the beginning Oracle to fire you, to prove > > > that they are indeed tyrants (which they proved quite well, > > > IMHO) > > > > > > And this is the only reason why such a logical consequence > > > of your action as resigning didn't happen simultaneously to the > > > announcement of TDF. I honestly can't imagine any other > > > obstacle. > > > ... > > -in French we say that there is "l'art et la manière". You can send > > me a private message, as an Oracle employee, asking me : "so > > Charles, when are you guys going away?" but if you send a public > > message kicking us out on vague grounds, ignoring our very own > > guidelines, that's very different. > > Charles, > > of course it's very different, but you're simply changing the subject > IMO. The real question was not "did Oracle behave well last saturday?" > When I started this thread I was really not interested in debating HOW > Oracle implemented the firing, resignation or whatever we'll call > it. I didn't mean to ask that. > > The real question was "why didn't the TDF founders who have/had > official roles in OOo publicly resign from those roles on Sept 28th, > one second BEFORE announcing the birth of TDF? Would'nt it have been > much more proper, considering that creating TDF is basically saying in > public "the way Oracle is handling OOo sucks so much that we can't > take it anymore"? Why all this surprise now?" > > You can't justify with something that A (badly) did 3 weeks later > something else that B didn't do (but should have done, IMHO) 3 weeks > earlier. Unless the reason B didn't act then was just to cause that > specific reaction in A now. > > The fact that, eventually, Oracle handled this matter beyond > expectations, that is doing just what it had been stimulated to do, > but in the worst possible manner for Oracle's image, is a _separate_ > issue. > > Anyway, what's done it's done. I (and then Ramon) have explained why > we think not resigning immediately was bad. You have answered. Let's > move on. Well, when we announced TDF it was not clear what Oracle would choose. Besides, some of us were still contributing to OOo (localization, etc.) and having resigned just before would have clearly signified that we were not interested in OOo anymore. Best, Charles. > > Marco > > -- E-mail to [email protected] for instructions on how to unsubscribe List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
