Just in case, calm yourself from other posts before reading this one :-).
> Yeah, I don't understand it either ;-).
Maybe you think the project got potentials. :-)
> It is indeed "your call", as much as it is mine or anybody else's. If
> there's something in there you disagree with, let's hear it and have it
> out, take the sad song and make it better, or try to convince you that
> you're wrong if indeed you are. That's the great thing about "Open
> Source", that it's "Open".
>
> Isn't it? Isn't that how this is all supposed to work? I hope "Open"
> ain't just lip service.
I dont believe open means consensus, thats why there are forks. People who
contribute the most are most likely to be the decision makers, this is the
same across all open source effort I know. (AOL developers still constitute
about half if not more contributers to this project.)
Mozilla/AOL relation are like Php/Zend, Zope/Zope corp, Gnome/Ximian. They
invest heavly in it, they got the expertise in the project and are the main
contributors. Naturally they should play a big part in decision making.
Thinking of senarios how mozilla will go if its forked, I can almost be
certain say that most of the work will still be done in the branch with AOL
employee's in there.
> "Bash" as in what exactly? I take it that you don't want me expressing
> my extreme disappointment in most things Mozilla, correct? I ask you
> sir, how does that do anybody any good?
Express it freely without the colorful expressions would be nice.
> > A "real" suggestion will make the developers think/listen and if enough
> > thinking go into it, it might get it done.
>
> I don't follow Mr. Lee. My suggestions are somehow not "thought
> through"? That certainly does not apply to my release criteria
> contributions, nor to this "Call for Openness". What exactly are you
> referring to?
I didnt say the criteria is a not a though through contribution, what I'm
refering to is that "Bitch. Loudly. Plainly. Incessantly. In public.
Not in some hidden 'bugzilla' gulag where nobody can hear you scream, just
the way the Duma likes it." is unnecessary.
> With all due respect sir, I find little about Mozilla that is worth
> praise. Four years worth of work that NC4.7x *still* kicks the crap out
> of in almost all respects is not a triumph, it is a tragedy. It is a
> tragedy caused solely by a lack of clear thinking, adequate leadership,
> and "Openness". I am doing the best I can to help correct these
> problems.
Matter of perspective, but even if you don't find anything thats worth
apprasing, all the colorful comment is unneccessary. Like you said the
project is being going on for four years, people get emotionally attach to
the project, call it a piece of shit (in public), is like laughing at a
children's drawing in front of his/her parents, other parents and teachers.
If you really want to help the children's drawing, give a few pointers, or
grab a pencil and start to draw with him/her. You want to encourage them,
not the opposite..
I'll say its more about the lack of formal documentation about the direction
mozilla is heading, its openly discusses on newsgroup, a agreement was
formed, implementation made but no document was produced in the process. I
remember your main disgruntle are xul, but IIRC that was based on open
discussion, then it was put to aol to see if they want to contribute to the
technology. Not the other way around.
> Using the case at hand as a prime example, I ask you sir, can you
> imagine a single reason why the two addresses I mention in this request
> are not available to the general public*? Ms. Baker RUNS MOZILLA.ORG
> for heaven's sake! What could possibly be more topical to mozilla.org
> than her "State Of The Mozilla" address? She is speaking for you,
> aren't you the least bit interested in what she had to say?
> *If indeed that is the case, and I haven't simply missed them somehow.
The address are already available to 'general public' who attended to
conference, its not a private 'investor only' meeting. Im sure if you email
Ms Baker she will give you a transcript of what she said for state of
mozilla. You might notice, most transcript for the conference are also not
up. O'reilly might want to uses these transcript to drive traffic to their
site at later date, there can be numerous of possible reason why transcript
are not available. But email her about it, dont take my word for it..
Mike
> --
> Gary "JTK" Van Sickle
