Robert Kropiewnicki writes: > Do you work for Inter7? Can you speak definitively to the fact that > they've shelved vpopmail for good on their end? No, you can't.
And can you speak definitively to say that they haven't? Despite Ken's sudden re-appearance here, can you positively, definitely state that Ken is going to be as active now and in the future as he was six months ago and that there will be no more sudden disappearances for months on end? > I've seen enough projects in enough companies get put on hold for > periods of time because there was something else that required more > attention. Heck, I've had projects I've worked on get put on hold > because management decided something else was a more pressing matter > only to return to the project when the pressing matter had been > completed. And in those cases I would expect the companies involved to be honest with external clients who are waiting for the completion of those projects, at least if the client asked when it was going to be ready. Clients are funny that way - if you tell them there has been a delay they may accept that delay but if you ignore them they go somewhere else. By not even saying that he was busy or delegating it to somebody else Ken put himself in the situation where people walked away. > Failure of Inter7's management to recognize the need for either visibly > active development or at the very least, acknowledge the fact that Ken's > hands were currently tied due to being assigned other projects should not > be held against Ken. No, it should be held against Inter 7. Which may or may not be Ken himself. Whether it was Ken's decision or that of a pointy-haired boss makes no difference. Somebody at Inter 7 thought it acceptable for Ken to ignore this list and vpopmail development for 6 months. I do not think that acceptable. > Disagree. If Linus Torvalds had to step away from working on the Linux > kernel for an extended period of time, would he have to justify why he > still deserved to be a lead on the project? If he stopped working on the kernel for 6 months without telling anyone, without responding to bug reports or patches and effectively stalling development until somebody forked development then he damned well would have to justify being a lead again. But we both know that Linus would not do that. If circumstances forced his absence for a prolonged period he would delegate control temporarily. Ken did not even delegate control temporarily. It was left to Tom to pick up the ball after realizing that Ken had apparently given up on things. It appears that the only reason Ken has expressed any interest since is because Tom formally took control and so Inter 7 would lose the right advertise themselves as the developers of vpopmail. I do not see any behaviour by Ken or Inter 7 that justifies Ken having administrative control but I do see a lot of behaviour by Ken that justifies him NOT having administrative control. -- Paul Allen Softflare Support