Lars Kneschke schrieb:
> "Ralf Becker" <RalfBecker@...> schrieb:
>> I weighted your concerns against the ones of the project, needing new
>> developers to help maintain and develop the existing code. I explained
>> my reasons for the decision.
> I don't see the benefit for the project when one developer which does not
> write any code gets added to the project and at least 2 longtime core
> developers are leaving the project.
You and Conny clearly stated, you both will not longer work on the
eGroupWare codebase, as you work on Tine now.
Nigel worked on the current FMail and is willing to continue that. I
understand you both have a personal problem with Nigel, but as Miles
already said, it's not stoping you to work on the project, as you work
on Tine and Nigel on eGroupWare.
>> You cited the constitution that the ultimate instance in the project are
>> the project members. In my understanding that does not mean an admin has
>> to do whatever a project member asks for. He has to follow (what he
>> thinks) the majority of the members want and of cause the constitution.
> What ever it means. Currently you are not acting for the project, but only
> for your self. From my point of view the project did not improve, since you
> added Nigel to the project. Since you added Nigel to the project, the
> project is in big trouble.
This is real way beyond you :-(
Who do you think is going to believe this!
I could say the same about you and Tine: since you started it, the
project is in trouble ;-)
>> For me this again boils down to: you and Conny have your idea how to
>> further develop the project (the complete rewrite you do with Tine).
>> Others (including me) have a different opinion. I don't think an admin
>> election makes any sense, before the decision which direction the
>> project as a whole wants to go!
> The project needs admins which care for the project. Currently we have no
> admins. Decissions take over 2 months.
Dont confuse a decision you dont like, with no decision.
>> Let's say the vote makes you and Conny two of the three admins and one
>> month later the majority decides not to use Tine as new eGW version in
>> future. Or the opposite the admins stay as they are and the majority
>> decides to use Tine.
> I don't think that we will get enough votes, if the developers are against
> our codebase.
>> It was you who wanted to wait with the vote "should Tine be the new eGW
>> version" 'til you are further with your "prove of concept". You stated
>> in December it will be in the first quarter of 2008. If you think you
>> are ready, just state so and we are going to vote on it. After that vote
>> we might want to have also an admin election, but shortly before it
>> makes absolutely no sense to me.
> We are not yet ready.
If you dont want to vote because you think you lose it or you are not
ready, what do you want?
eGroupWare Training & Support ==> http://www.egroupware-support.de
Outdoor Unlimited Training GmbH [www.outdoor-training.de]
Handelsregister HRB Kaiserslautern 3587
Geschäftsführer Birgit und Ralf Becker
Leibnizstr. 17, 67663 Kaiserslautern, Germany
Telefon +49 (0)631 31657-0