On Tue, 15 Mar 2005, Julien BLACHE wrote:
For $DEITY's sake. Will you please understand that the Ubuntu folks
totally failed to inform their fellows about what was going on ? And
at the time, there was no Canonical website, no Ubuntu website. Only a
handful of patches up on no-name-yet.
I think we deserved a better explanation.
Hmmm, I do not remember that Corel did some better information policy
when they made a Debian derived distribution. There are other examples
as well. I do not want to compare Ubuntu with those commercial
distributors, but if we build a FREE operating system nobody has to
inform us about anything as long it is conform to our license.
And no, I do not exactly know what Ububtu people are doing but I see
no harm in it if they employ a certain amount of DDs as other companies
do as well. Please could we concentrate back on our own problems instead
of discussing the problems of other distributions.
Our own problem is whether certain groups inside Debian have problems
in communication with other interested people which do not (yet)
belong directly to this group. I would answer this question with:
Yes, by a certain amount.
We have to enhance communication as a certain kind of documentation:
1. Reasonable protocols of discussion inside these groups are
be useful for their own work. These protocols can be opened
(we don't hide problems).
2. Lower barriere for potential helpers to step in (because they
are informed about what's going on.)
3. This would (hopefully) reduce FUD.
So why not setting up at a certain web space containing information about
meeting of groups like the Vancouver meeting:
1. Date + Time
2. Location
3. Agenda
4. Invited people
---> This should be published before the meeting
5. Log about the points which were discussed after the meeting in
form of a technical documentation
Kind regards
Andreas.
--
http://fam-tille.de
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
