[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       koffice-devel
Subject:    Continuing Community Issues
From:       Robert Marmorstein <robert () narnia ! homeunix ! com>
Date:       2011-02-01 4:18:51
Message-ID: 20110131231851.69872w9vpwcfjjs4 () robot4 ! narnia ! homeunix ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

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


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]