On 16-05-05 12:24 PM, Daniel Dickinson wrote: > On 16-05-05 12:21 PM, Jonathan Bennett wrote: > [snip] >> > The changes that the Lede guys are suggesting would be welcome, but >> > splitting the project and community with an ugly fork is very much not >> > welcome. >> >> Let's just say that there are strong personalities who haven't been >> working well together and that this has been a long time coming; perhaps >> if something like using a mediator had been considered before things got >> to this point it would have helped. At this point I'm not sure >> there is a >> solution unless both sides are willing to bend a little (I'm really not >> sure who has been flexible and who has not, but as I have said I suspect >> a large part of the issue is that 'management' (who aren't and don't, >> really) has overruled those doing the majority of the work and in an >> open source project that doesn't fly). >> >> I don't disagree. I just see the current state of Openwrt/Lede as a >> mess for the community. > > I agree, I just don't see how the LEDE team could have avoided it > without giving up and accepting the broken status quo.
When I say broken I mean I think openwrt was dying and I pointed out not all that long ago that openwrt was in bad position and that something needed to change, and I think that may have been *part* of the reason accepting the status quo was no longer an acceptable answer. Regards, Daniel _______________________________________________ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel