From kde-core-devel Wed Mar 12 17:40:15 2003 From: Marc Mutz Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2003 17:40:15 +0000 To: kde-core-devel Subject: Re: glib in kdesupport: yes or no? X-MARC-Message: https://marc.info/?l=kde-core-devel&m=104749092606517 MIME-Version: 1 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="--Boundary-02=_AE3b+dVFJbxuJuR" --Boundary-02=_AE3b+dVFJbxuJuR Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Description: signed data Content-Disposition: inline On Wednesday 12 March 2003 14:59, Neil Stevens wrote: > Your suggestion pre-supposes that KDE will obey the dictates of these > groups, You completely miss the point. It's not about "obeying the dictates of=20 these groups" but to _contribute_ to "those groups". > whic\ means that even fewer KDE decisions will be made on KDE > lists where KDE people can see them. Those who are interested in the common standards are free to join the=20 resp. mailing lists. You don't complain that khtml decision are made on=20 kfm-devel and not on kde-core-devel, do you? That kmail decisions are=20 made on kmail@kde.org? So where is the difference to freedesktop.org=20 mailing lists (or ietf or w3c or even red hat, if they host such a=20 standards-making project)? That they're not @kde.org? C'mon... > Might as well drop the whole pretense that KDE is an open project. Everyone is free to subscibe to the resp mailing lists. If your=20 definition of openness is that you need to be CC'd on every decision,=20 then I fear KDE is not an open project in your sense, no. Marc =2D-=20 "Similia similibus curentur" -- Bush's new motto in fighting terrorism. --Boundary-02=_AE3b+dVFJbxuJuR Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Description: signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQA+b3EA3oWD+L2/6DgRAn/uAKCsGpNa0c+vEe8W8nU57q3obcANYgCcDJJu iNJz9kJj9+uOo/F3HDv6haI= =ue// -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Boundary-02=_AE3b+dVFJbxuJuR--