"Manfred Usselmann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb: > Read your own press release again. It doesn't contain the word > 'experimental'. Instead you emphasize 'official subproject' several > times and thereby create the false impression that the decision, that > Tine will be the future technological base of eGW, has already been > made by the project as a whole. Ok. That's an impression. But that was not our intention. There are several places where we state very clearly, that we are yet experimental. And we also did not state that we are the future code base for eGroupWare. We also call us Tine 2.0. And not eGroupWare 2.0 anymore.
> I really appreciate your effort to modernize eGW, but IMO you should > also take into account that the other project members, who are not yet > fully convinced of your proposal, need some kind of protection of their > investment into the existing framework. This is essential and it would > be good if you could stop ignoring this. And it is also to your own > advantage if the customers are still using eGW at the time when Tine > may be ready for productive use. It's not good if you base all your > decisions on the displeasing quarrel which occurred. Just have look at the time line again. We had a meeting with Ralf and Nigel to talk about how we can improve the current codebase. It was our intention to work on eGroupWare 1.4. They rejected our ideas in general and insulted us. That's the reason why have started Tine 2.0. There would have been no Tine 2.0 project and no discussion, if they would not have rejected our ideas in general. They would not have to protect their investments, because we had been improving their investments. I don't ignore their investments, but I can also not ignore my investments, if you like to call it like that. They also stated that are still working on eGroupWare 1.x codeline. Of course this situation is strange. But the project admins can't solve the problem, by simply ignoring Tine 2.0. > IMO eGW indeed needs a double-track approach, but members of both > groups really should consider the interests of the opposite side as > well. Please don't act against each other, but settle your differences, > make agreements with the necessary allowances and stick to them. The > project has only a chance of you build the future together. I'm very open to any agreement. As long as it does not mean, that we need get invisible again. We are also part of the eGroupWare project. -- Lars Kneschke CTO OfficeSpot.Net Metaways Infosystems GmbH Pickhuben 2-4, D-20457 Hamburg eGroupWare Support: http://www.egroupware-support.net OfficeSpot.Net Collaboration Server: http://cs.officespot.net our proposal for the next major eGroupWare release: http://www.tine20.org E-Mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Web: http://www.metaways.de Tel: +49 (0)40 317031-21 Fax: +49 (0)40 317031-921 Mobile: +49 (0)175 9304324 Metaways Infosystems GmbH - Sitz: D-22967 Tremsbüttel Handelsregister: Amtsgericht Ahrensburg HRB 4508 Geschäftsführung: Hermann Thaele, Lüder-H.Thaele ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ _______________________________________________ eGroupWare-core mailing list eGroupWare-core@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/egroupware-core
