If it's best for the community, what's the problem? The only thing we need to make sure is that the "platform" is managed by the community itself. As i said before, personally i would prefer only one OS flash community, managed by itself, but supported by Adobe. Am i asking too much??? :)
João Saleiro Martin Heidegger wrote: > Well, I don't see it s conspiracy or as aim of Adobe. If you have > power and you use it - > its always creating kettles of reactions(in any situation in life - > imho). Someone does > something with a good intention and ends up in having a bad situation > for others. > > > To me it RIAFlash looks like one of those approachs that feature to a > certain group. > A group that is not yet archived by another group (osflash). Its > reasonable to improve > the access to the projects and its reasonable (and held as good > fashion) to set a different > focus: But if you have power(like Adobe has) its like a magnet. And > this magnet has the > power to move lots of peoples attention to itself (even the people > that ARE supposed or > targeted by the other focus - osflash). I exactly described this case > where the big player > lacks in overview and seriously harms small parts unwillingly. > > Some of Adobe's Actions deffinitly affect the life of open source > flash in general as > contra productive and or destructive. Of course not all but why should > I be calm if > I recognized things like this happen? > > yours > Martin. > > btw.: I don't see Adobe as bad. I just see some of the things > happening as not well thought. > > > > > > 2006/10/19, João Saleiro <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>>: > > I do want to take any sides, but I agree with Mike. "Conspiracy > theory" > for me doesn't fit, I believe in dialog. > As a user, i would prefer to have only one open-source flash community > recognized and supported by Adobe, but completely managed by the > community itself. I don't think this is that difficult to achieve, > it's > just a question of dialog and effort. And to know if it's > something that > everybody wants (both the osflash community and Adobe). > > ... just my opinion... > > João Saleiro > > Mike Chambers wrote: > > Im going to call bullshit on that. > > > > We have been very supportive of OSFlash, mentioning it in articles, > > numerous keynotes, and contributing projects to it. > > > > Look, this isnt some big conspiracy. Some people wanted to setup a > > site that could host projects revolving around multiple Adobe > > prodcuts and technologies (not just Flash). Did they screw up by > not > > pinging Aral and other OSFLash people first to give them a heads up? > > Yes. But that doesn't mean we are out to kill OSFlash. > > > > Sorry for the rant, but this is completely ridiculous. I realize it > > is fun to play the "us verses the big bad corporation card", but > > sometimes it is really just a stretch. > > > > mike chambers > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > On Oct 19, 2006, at 5:06 AM, Martin Heidegger wrote: > > > > > >> Question: Where is the point in putting efforts into a open source > >> platform if the platform distributor does not pay value/attention > >> to what they already do? > >> > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > osflash mailing list > > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > > http://osflash.org/mailman/listinfo/osflash_osflash.org > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > osflash mailing list > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > http://osflash.org/mailman/listinfo/osflash_osflash.org > > > > > -- > ICQ: 117662935 > Skype: mastakaneda > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > osflash mailing list > [email protected] > http://osflash.org/mailman/listinfo/osflash_osflash.org > _______________________________________________ osflash mailing list [email protected] http://osflash.org/mailman/listinfo/osflash_osflash.org
