On Wednesday 27. October 2010 10.10.23 Cyrille Berger Skott wrote:
> On Wednesday 27 October 2010, Thomas Zander wrote:
> > With this background, maybe you can re-read my mail. The main point is
> > the way  of working with a community in an open model with open hearted
> > and fair discussions. Design discussions to get to a good solution even
> > before people submit a patch is a great thing to strive for.
> 
> I think we all agree with that.
> 
> As for the rest of the email, I am ignoring it because as I mentioned in my
> initial email: "acknowledge, that at this point there is no sense in trying
> to place the  blame anywhere, we just have to accept the fact". So lets
> work as making this moment as unpleasant to everybody.

Nobody is putting blame, it is also clear you made up your mind to be on group 
B, and as such I'm fine with you ignoring it. The mail was thus not meant for 
you.

I'm not sure why you replied to the email as I stated just what my plans are 
for Group A. Is there any reason for you to object to the stated strategy of a 
group you don't want to be part of?

> For the KOffice name, we will all have the opportunity to make a plea to
> the KDE ev board.

Thanks for repeating that; we all ageed naming is not a discussion point at 
this time.
-- 
Thomas Zander
_______________________________________________
koffice-devel mailing list
koffice-devel@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/koffice-devel