From koffice-devel Tue Feb 01 04:18:51 2011 From: Robert Marmorstein Date: Tue, 01 Feb 2011 04:18:51 +0000 To: koffice-devel Subject: Continuing Community Issues Message-Id: <20110131231851.69872w9vpwcfjjs4 () robot4 ! narnia ! homeunix ! com> X-MARC-Message: https://marc.info/?l=koffice-devel&m=129653567723283 Apologies in advance if this goes through more than once -- I've been having Kolab issues.... ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I have refrained from posting here for awhile -- partly because of problems with Kolab and kdepim (I use latest trunk) and partly because I have been afraid that if people know I plan to continue contributing to koffice (or whatever "group A" will eventually be called), that I will be blackballed from also contributing to Calligra. After talking with Inge today, though, I realize that this was probably a mistake. I don't want to open the whole can of worms up again, but I would like to request that developers in "Group B" be more circumspect in how they behave toward visitors to public koffice forums, especially the IRC channel and the mailing list. I believe that a lot of what bothers me stems from two issues: A. Unresolved animosity between Thomas and the group B developers. B. Misinformation or misunderstandings about Group A. In particular, I feel that many of you have assumed that "Group A" is really just Thomas. That is simply not true. I personally hope to contribute to both projects and there are one or two others who have also continued to contribute. It's also not true that we are working only on kword. One of the things I have been working on (for some time, actually) involves improving GUI support for variables in several koffice applications. As far as I know, it is true that Group A has not formally decided who is maintaining what. That is largely because we do not have any dedicated channel for communicating with just "Group A" right now and it is difficult to use the old channels when the old disputes keep recurring in them. So, I guess what I am saying is that I would greatly appreciate it if developers would make an effort to avoid broad generalizations about who belongs to "Group A" on the IRC channel. Directing users and new developers to Calligra is not what bothers me. It is the implied message that Calligra is now the "only official koffice" that often accompanies it. I have seen several IRC pots that give users the impression that development has entirely stopped in the Group A branch, which is untrue. Instead of saying things like "all the real developers have moved to Group B, try #calligra instead.", perhaps you could say something like: "the maintainers of several of the koffice components have moved to Calligra, but Group A is also continuing to develop them. You can ask in #calligra if you are interested in the new direction the group is moving."? I'm sure Thomas would prefer that you not mention Calligra at all in the koffice channel, but I realize that this is an area of ongoing debate which will eventually be decided by the arbitration process. In the meantime, if the rest of you could make an effort toward civility and a balanced treatment of the two projects, that would make life a lot easier for those of us "caught in between". Thanks, Robert ---------------------------------------------------------------- This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program. _______________________________________________ koffice-devel mailing list koffice-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/koffice-devel