|
It's not been possible for me so far to discuss things in a
professional manner. I think I am trying and have done well, but I
only receive insults in return. But, here we go again. This is from
me and is not an official admin statement: The press releases appear to be in violation of the admin statement from December, which also makes them in violation of the constitution. I don't see a reason for their existence other than to provoke a response. There has been no explanation other than asking "why can't we do this," which is certainly not a denial of responsibility. So, the question is what to actually do about it. No one wants to lose developers. But, as far as I am concerned, the real motivation on their part is to be the sole influence on the direction of the project regardless of the wishes of the developers, user base, or administrative staff. The fact that this work appears to be essentially funded by a single company worries me, as I am very suspicious of their motives. Even if these developers have only the best intentions, they cannot really know what their company will do in the future as far as code ownership, alliances with larger corporations or governments, etc. I would rather that the project not be subject to the whim of their employer, or any other single entity which is not built specifically and only to promote and protect the egroupware project. I hope everyone will at least think about this as we move forward. In summary, if you have no respect for the admins, or their statements as made within and as an extension of the constitution of this project, then you have no respect for the constitution itself, regardless of who the admins are. This means that you have no respect for the project, as the constitution is the organizing document for the project. If you want to change it, then there are procedures set forth for this purpose. Otherwise, you must respect these rules if you wish to continue to remain as members of the project. You accepted the admin statement on or around 12-18-2007. Your acceptance is, however, not required. The fact is that the statement has been made and is now part of our organizing principles. I feel that the methods used so far are inline with that concept, as agreed upon by all voting members several years ago. You can create your own rules, if you wish. But, you will not do it here. Christian Binder wrote: Hi again,PS: Do you think it is possible throwing all personal resentments away, starting from scratch? Trying to discuss professional? I am willing to do so. But not only technically more in the way to get the project more stable and keep the user needs in mind. Probably we should hold a conference somewhere personally or a telco discussing as long as we get a conclusion. BUT be warned everybody will have to make compromises (me too) :) -- Miles Lott 832-754-7006 |
------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
