Let us stop this now and put this war behind us. I can see that Tom has
added Ken as an admin. Cheers to Tom and Ken
On Wed, 2003-09-10 at 19:39, Benjamin Tomhave, CISSP wrote:
> First off, everybody needs to quit whining. Seriously, if Tom hadn't
> taken up the reins, there would be ZERO DEVELOPMENT on this project right
> now. Unless you were willing to send a truck of cash to Inter7, they
> would often not even respond to emails asking whether development would
> continue, let alone addressing actual, verified bugs in the code.
> Second, if there's confusion about what a "devel" release is versus a
> stable release, then I suggest you go back to kindergarten, because this
> is NOT A NEW METHOD for developing an open source project. If you're
> confused, perhaps it's because you're not very smart, in which case maybe
> you ought not be a systems administrator. Some of us are running devel
> code in our production environments because we needed features that Inter7
> didn't seem inclined to add, such as seekable patch, etc. Under the
> pressure of meeting customer demands, it has been absolutely necessary to
> install devel releases. HOWEVER, that DOESN'T MEAN installing EVERY devel
> release -- just installing one that seems stable while providing the
> needed functionality.
> Third, there are certainly improvements that can be made to the PROCESS.
> But, btw, in case everybody was sleeping when he announced it, Tom has
> created a vpopmail-devel mailing list where all of you can contribute to
> the devel discussions, where, oh btw, the question of CVS access has been
> presented previous and will, I believe, be forthcoming.
> Should this be a separate fork? No. Why? Because, imho, regardless of
> what Ken Jones might claim, vpopmail has been shelved by Inter7, and is
> thus a dead product without this open source SF project. Inter7 has
> failed, probably for economic reasons, to continue supporting the product
> in the open source community, which has been a very common occurrence over
> the past few years. That anybody took over the development and moved it
> forward is quite amazing, and I think we all ought to heartily thank Tom
> for doing so.
> Now, onto the specific concerns raised, I think the following practice
> should be adopted:
> 1) CVS should be enabled.
> 2) If KJ wants to be an admin, then he needs to justify his request more
> than "it was my baby originally", and then he should be added.
> 3) Instead of "releasing" devel releases, I think we should switch to a
> "nightly build" approach so that there is "stable-current" and then
> "latest-devel", and not a string of devel releases. Tom, I would probably
> list 3 packages total: 5.2.x-stable, the last 5.3.x release from Inter7,
> and then 5.3.x-latest-devel.
> 4) Inter7 needs to get over themselves and gradually join back into the
> development, IF AND ONLY IF they plan to play nicely with others. If they
> don't, then maybe they should go get bent since there's been a ton of
> positive movement on this project in their absence. NO FORKING.
> Disclaimer: If you disagree with these comments, that's your prerogative,
> but I personally don't want to hear sniping comments back about it,
> because frankly, I don't value the opinion of most of you. The list
> membership over the past year has become overpopulated with whiny idiots
> who have no appreciation for where the product has been, how it almost
> died, and how it has now seen tremendous progress in the absence of Ken
> and Inter7.
> > On Tuesday, September 9, 2003, at 10:07 AM, Ken Jones wrote:
> >> Just so everyone knows. Tom Collins is attempting
> >> to fork the vpopmail project. He refuses to let me
> >> share ownership of the vpopmail and qmailadmin
> >> projects on source forge. When I asked him to
> >> add me as an owner on the project he said he
> >> refuses now and at any time in the future to
> >> allow me to share ownership.
> > I have forked ownership since I felt that Inter7 was doing a poor job
> > of maintaining vpopmail and qmailadmin. I readily acknowledge that Ken
> > created vpopmail and qmailadmin. They're GPL projects, so I'm free to
> > fork them if I like. Since moving the projects to SourceForge, we've
> > kept up with submitted patches and bug reports. I feel that making the
> > move was beneficial to the projects themselves and the people that use
> > them.
> > I'm certainly not doing this to be malicious or to hurt Ken and Inter7.
> > I've told Ken that he's more than welcome to contribute to the project
> > on SourceForge, or to maintain his own version of vpopmail and
> > qmailadmin. I also stated that until I stopped actively maintaining
> > vpopmail and qmailadmin, I saw no need to add him as a project
> > administrator. Michael Bowe has been actively involved with vpopmail
> > development, and I had no problem adding him as an admin.
> > Ken Jones hasn't contributed to vpopmail and qmailadmin development
> > since March. We've had 12 qmailadmin releases and 7 vpopmail releases
> > since then. Managing the projects on SourceForge keeps everything out
> > in the open, and allows anyone to contribute.
> > Ken hasn't stated why he wants to be an owner of the project. I'm not
> > sure I understand what he loses out on by being a developer on the
> > project and not an admin.
> > --
> > Tom Collins
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > QmailAdmin: http://qmailadmin.sf.net/ Vpopmail: http://vpopmail.sf.net/
> > Info on the Sniffter hand-held Network Tester: http://sniffter.com/