On Sat, Dec 10, 2005 14:29:56 PM +0100, Gianluca Turconi
([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>
> Well, Marco, I've to object vigorously to your statement because the
> article's author has committed the worst error in pure Logic, this
> is to say he has elevated a concept from the particular level (the
> OOo project) to the general one (the open source developing method)
> without any kind of evidence except some empiric and limited
> experiences done by him.
>
> This assertion is evident in the article's introduction: "The
> OpenOffice project vividly illustrates the limitations of open
> source as a way of producing software".
>
> Even if all things he said about OOo project were true (and many are
> not), he could not transfer such conclusions to the whole open
> source movement.
Hmm, re-reading my own posts I can understand your objections, I
should have been more explicit, sorry...
What I mean is (with the exceptions and comments I already made) that
I *do* find most of Andrews's conclusions *valid* for "the whole open
source movement", *not* just OpenOffice, as least as far as desktop
software is concerned. Novell Evolution is the first other proof which
comes to mind, but there are many others.
So, I don't know about Andrew, he'll surely speak for himself, but as
far as *I* am concerned I sure can elevate that article to the
"general level concept" status, as I've gathered enough evidence
myself in several projects over the years. Without denying for a
moment *your* (one of few exceptions, not the rule) excellent work and
dedication to OO.o.
Ciao,
Marco
--
Marco Fioretti mfioretti, at the server mclink.it
Fedora Core 3 for low memory http://www.rule-project.org/
The test of success in education...is not what a boy knows after
examination on leaving school but what he is doing ten years later.
Robert Baden Powell, founder of the Boy Scouts
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
