Vote about which codeline should use the name "eGroupWare"

[ralfbecker]

We, the admins of the eGroupWare project, think the answers from Lars
and Conny to our prior statement do not settle the issue by coming to a
real decision, but rather by showing only the will to continue with the
current situation.

We could now force by admin decision one of the alternatives of the
statement. But, we think that for a decision of this magnitude that this
should be decided by a vote of the project members instead.

We also think this vote has to be, in the best interest of the project,
done as quickly as possible, as the current situation is eroding the
project, slowing down the development and unsettling our users.
We don't think that waiting for a "proof of concept" to be finished
makes any sense, as our problem is not with the written or future code,
but with the basic approach, its dogma and magnitude.


Therefore, we call upon the members of the eGroupWare project for a vote
on the following:

YES, if you are in favor of:  The existing codeline keeping the name
"eGroupWare" and continuing to evolve the existing codebase with it's
broad range of applications.  The new codeline has to form a new project
under a new name as well as discontinuing the use of our mailing lists
for purposes of advertising their new code, petitioning developers, etc.

NO, if you are in favor of:  Lars & Conny's new codeline using the name
"eGroupWare" for their new development.  The existing codeline would be
forked into a new project (though fork is the wrong word as they would
be the only ones using and supporting the existing code).


According to our constitution, the vote must be at least one week after
the vote has been announced on the mailing list.

We ask for your votes on 20th December 2007 (full day UTC time).

We suggest that either Peter Vratny or Oscar Manuel Gómez Senovilla act
as "election master", who will announce the full formalities, collect
and count the votes and announce the result.


Your eGroupWare admins

Ralf Becker, Pim Snel, Miles Lott

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services
for just about anything Open Source.
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;164216239;13503038;w?http://sf.net/marketplace
_______________________________________________
eGroupWare-core mailing list
eGroupWare-core@...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/egroupware-core

[Carsten Wolff]

Hi.

My vote is: NULL
(because either choice makes me sad)

I only read egroupware-core. Maybe that's the reason why all this sounds so
familiar to me. Once again I'm thinking "What the hell is going on? Why is
everybody so unreasonable?" and once again I have the feeling, that more
things happened behind the scenes, than a reader of this list gets.

I'm tired of the fights in this project, that result in either forks or loss
of manpower, a ressource, eGW is short of anyway. I know I'm not the biggest
contributor and my word may not weigh very much, but I hope, everyone will
recognize that this is a free software project. If you want to try changing
big parts of the code and rewrite the UI, just open a branch in svn. Call it
make_it_cool or whatever and hack away. Don't register Domains named after
the next major version for a proof of concept and on the other hand don't
bash people who want to experiment on new ways of doing things. Be nice to
each other, make compromise and in the end, if you can not decide on a
technology to use together, let the users decide over time which approach
will be ultimately more successful.

Carsten

--
Carsten Wolff
Tel.: [phone] / 46 43-0

credativ GmbH, HRB Mönchengladbach 12080
Hohenzollernstr. 133, 41061 Mönchengladbach
Geschäftsführung: Dr. Michael Meskes, Jörg Folz

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services
for just about anything Open Source.
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;164216239;13503038;w?http://sf.net/marketplace
_______________________________________________
eGroupWare-core mailing list
eGroupWare-core@...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/egroupware-core

[ralfbecker]

Hi Carsten,

Carsten Wolff schrieb:
> Hi.
>
> My vote is: NULL
> (because either choice makes me sad)

Me too, thought there's not always a happy ending :-(

> I only read egroupware-core. Maybe that's the reason why all this sounds so
> familiar to me. Once again I'm thinking "What the hell is going on? Why is
> everybody so unreasonable?" and once again I have the feeling, that more
> things happened behind the scenes, than a reader of this list gets.

The core list, is the last frequented one. There's more information on
the developer or the German list.

> I'm tired of the fights in this project, that result in either forks or loss
> of manpower, a ressource, eGW is short of anyway. I know I'm not the biggest
> contributor and my word may not weigh very much, but I hope, everyone will
> recognize that this is a free software project. If you want to try changing
> big parts of the code and rewrite the UI, just open a branch in svn. Call it
> make_it_cool or whatever and hack away. Don't register Domains named after
> the next major version for a proof of concept and on the other hand don't

Nicely said :-)

> bash people who want to experiment on new ways of doing things. Be nice to

I dont think we, the admins, are bashing at people.

We have no problem with someone experimenting or trying out new ways, eg.
- create a new UI for 4 core apps, still usable via the existing UI
- write a new API based on the Zend Framework, offering the existing
interfaces

We have a problem with the magnitude of the approach and it's dogma: no
existing code should be able to run in the new environment. Of cause we
also have a problem announcing it as the future or next version, without
any consensus, as you already mentioned it.

I dont want to state all arguments again, as they are already on the
lists in a manageable number of threads.

> each other, make compromise and in the end, if you can not decide on a
> technology to use together, let the users decide over time which approach
> will be ultimately more successful.

You can NOT say, we have not tried with a compromise ...

I'm fine letting the users decide over time, they will do it anyway.

Ralf
--
Ralf Becker
eGroupWare Training & Support ==> http://www.egroupware-support.de
Outdoor Unlimited Training GmbH [www.outdoor-training.de]
Handelsregister HRB Kaiserslautern 3587
Geschäftsführer Birgit und Ralf Becker
Leibnizstr. 17, 67663 Kaiserslautern, Germany
Telefon [phone]

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services
for just about anything Open Source.
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;164216239;13503038;w?http://sf.net/marketplace
_______________________________________________
eGroupWare-core mailing list
eGroupWare-core@...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/egroupware-core

[Milosch]

I just wanted to say that I really appreciate your email and cannot
disagree with any of it.  However, we are already past the point where
there is any movement in negotiation.  The idea that anyone in the
project or outside of it can put themselves out as the next generation
of development without working with those within the project in an
official and organized manner seems to me to be anarchy, and I am not in
favor of that.  There must be organization, especially in such
large-scale endeavors.

This is my opinion alone.

Carsten Wolff wrote:

> Hi.
>
> My vote is: NULL
> (because either choice makes me sad)
>
> I only read egroupware-core. Maybe that's the reason why all this sounds so
> familiar to me. Once again I'm thinking "What the hell is going on? Why is
> everybody so unreasonable?" and once again I have the feeling, that more
> things happened behind the scenes, than a reader of this list gets.
>
> I'm tired of the fights in this project, that result in either forks or loss
> of manpower, a ressource, eGW is short of anyway. I know I'm not the biggest
> contributor and my word may not weigh very much, but I hope, everyone will
> recognize that this is a free software project. If you want to try changing
> big parts of the code and rewrite the UI, just open a branch in svn. Call it
> make_it_cool or whatever and hack away. Don't register Domains named after
> the next major version for a proof of concept and on the other hand don't
> bash people who want to experiment on new ways of doing things. Be nice to
> each other, make compromise and in the end, if you can not decide on a
> technology to use together, let the users decide over time which approach
> will be ultimately more successful.
>
> Carsten
>
>  

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services
for just about anything Open Source.
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;164216239;13503038;w?http://sf.net/marketplace
_______________________________________________
eGroupWare-core mailing list
eGroupWare-core@...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/egroupware-core

[Oscar Manuel Gómez Senovilla]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Miles Lott escribió:
> I just wanted to say that I really appreciate your email and cannot
> disagree with any of it.  However, we are already past the point where
> there is any movement in negotiation.  The idea that anyone in the
> project or outside of it can put themselves out as the next generation
> of development without working with those within the project in an
> official and organized manner seems to me to be anarchy, and I am not in
> favor of that.  There must be organization, especially in such
> large-scale endeavors.


I agree with Carsten and 99% with Miles, but if it's just a matter of
timeline, and taking that we all want to have a good ending, I just
propose, as intermediate point:


Why not allow the Metaways developers keep *investigating* in extjs (or
whatever) as long as they change the domain (which they already did) but
don't bind it in any way to egw? What will happen only time within some
months will decide, but trying to exclude it *right now* I think it's an
error. I also think it's a mistake trying to decide *right now* that
"tine" is *the only* way for future egw, apart from not allowing any
kind of compliance with current egw api. Maybe in, let's say, one year,
current egw api uses some new api/framework/whatever that makes possible
to reach a common intermediate point that, if the tine team still keeps
developing and on their belief for unique possible way, at least there's
a way to reach integration. And if not in one year, in two years, then
three, etc. And maybe the current egw framework has found another way
that's even more powerful than others. The summary is that everything
can happen in the future in any of both sides.


As another side note, and as *I think if I'm wrong* what was done
previously with Christian investigations on ajax vs Olivier
investigations with dojo, just leave them perform tests and time will
decide what works better.

> Carsten Wolff wrote:
>> Hi.
>>
>> My vote is: NULL
>> (because either choice makes me sad)
>>
>> I only read egroupware-core. Maybe that's the reason why all this sounds so
>> familiar to me. Once again I'm thinking "What the hell is going on? Why is
>> everybody so unreasonable?" and once again I have the feeling, that more
>> things happened behind the scenes, than a reader of this list gets.
>>
>> I'm tired of the fights in this project, that result in either forks or loss
>> of manpower, a ressource, eGW is short of anyway. I know I'm not the biggest
>> contributor and my word may not weigh very much, but I hope, everyone will
>> recognize that this is a free software project. If you want to try changing
>> big parts of the code and rewrite the UI, just open a branch in svn. Call it
>> make_it_cool or whatever and hack away. Don't register Domains named after
>> the next major version for a proof of concept and on the other hand don't
>> bash people who want to experiment on new ways of doing things. Be nice to
>> each other, make compromise and in the end, if you can not decide on a
>> technology to use together, let the users decide over time which approach
>> will be ultimately more successful.

- --

|----------------------------------------------------------------------|
| http://counter.li.org info: Linux user: 92390 - Linux machine: 39301 |
|        Oscar Manuel Gómez Senovilla - omgsATescomposlinux.org        |
|               GPG Key at http://pgp.escomposlinux.org                |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------|
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFHYbmmQpr3kykd/aQRAj98AJ0eNgMV1XllnhjACo2GidYf7HISlgCfYdPr
++2XMkxYc1125rjUk+AU0gI=
=cqsO
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services
for just about anything Open Source.
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;164216239;13503038;w?http://sf.net/marketplace
_______________________________________________
eGroupWare-core mailing list
eGroupWare-core@...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/egroupware-core

[Lars Kneschke-2]

"Oscar Manuel Gómez Senovilla" <omgs@...> schrieb:

> Why not allow the Metaways developers keep *investigating* in extjs (or
> whatever) as long as they change the domain (which they already did) but
> don't bind it in any way to egw? What will happen only time within some
> months will decide, but trying to exclude it *right now* I think it's an
> error. I also think it's a mistake trying to decide *right now* that
> "tine" is *the only* way for future egw, apart from not allowing any
> kind of compliance with current egw api. Maybe in, let's say, one year,
> current egw api uses some new api/framework/whatever that makes possible
> to reach a common intermediate point that, if the tine team still keeps
> developing and on their belief for unique possible way, at least there's
> a way to reach integration. And if not in one year, in two years, then
> three, etc. And maybe the current egw framework has found another way
> that's even more powerful than others. The summary is that everything
> can happen in the future in any of both sides.

Hello Oscar!

Just to state it again, as many developers still did not understand what we
are doing.

In the summer we sat together with Ralf, try to talk with him about our
ideas, how Cornelius and I like to improve the CURRENT codebase of
eGroupWare. At this time Cornelius was not a Metaways employee and it was
also never planed that he will become one. At this meeting Ralf and Nigel
Vickers from Stylite denied any of our requests how to we liked to improve
the CURRENT codebase of eGroupWare. Because Ralf and Nigel denied any of our
ideas, we have started our own codebase on our own servers.

Now we are working on a proof of concept, how we think eGroupWare can work
and look like in the future. This will allow the other developers in the
project to decide themself, if our ideas are good or not. This proof of
concept is limited to 4 applications and will have no backward
compatibility. It's a proof of concept. When we have finished the proof of
concept(scheduled for the first quarter 2008) and we like to have a vote, if
the other developers like our codebase or not. If the other developers like
our codebase, we can start thinking about how we can add
backwardcompatibility and we can start talking about a longterm migration
path. We are working for eGroupWare not against.

Currently we need to learn about ExtJS, JavaScript and JSON. It simply makes
no sense in the current state to talk about backwardcompatibility. We can do
only one step after the other. It makes no sense to  repeat the same errors,
I did already with FeLaMiMail.
--
Lars Kneschke
CTO OfficeSpot.Net
Metaways Infosystems GmbH
Pickhuben 2-4, D-20457 Hamburg

eGroupWare Support: http://www.egroupware-support.net
OfficeSpot.Net Collaboration Server: http://cs.officespot.net
our proposal for the next major eGroupWare release: http://www.tine20.org

E-Mail: mailto:l.kneschke@...
Web: http://www.metaways.de
Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Mobile: [phone]

Metaways Infosystems GmbH - Sitz: D-22967 Tremsbüttel
Handelsregister: Amtsgericht Ahrensburg HRB 4508
Geschäftsführung: Hermann Thaele, Lüder-H.Thaele



-------------------------------------------------------------------------
SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services
for just about anything Open Source.
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;164216239;13503038;w?http://sf.net/marketplace
_______________________________________________
eGroupWare-core mailing list
eGroupWare-core@...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/egroupware-core

[Lars Kneschke-2]

"Miles Lott" <milos@...> schrieb:
> I just wanted to say that I really appreciate your email and cannot
> disagree with any of it.  However, we are already past the point where
> there is any movement in negotiation.  
It's really sad that you reached that point, before getting in contact with
us directly.


> The idea that anyone in the
> project or outside of it can put themselves out as the next generation
> of development without working with those within the project in an
> official and organized manner seems to me to be anarchy, and I am not in
> favor of that.  There must be organization, especially in such
> large-scale endeavors.
You totally ignore the fact, that we stated multiple times, that it was not
our intention to do this. If you still don't know why we did it, feel free
to get in contact with us.

I would have acted different as admin.


--
Lars Kneschke
CTO OfficeSpot.Net
Metaways Infosystems GmbH
Pickhuben 2-4, D-20457 Hamburg

eGroupWare Support: http://www.egroupware-support.net
OfficeSpot.Net Collaboration Server: http://cs.officespot.net
our proposal for the next major eGroupWare release: http://www.tine20.org

E-Mail: mailto:l.kneschke@...
Web: http://www.metaways.de
Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Mobile: [phone]

Metaways Infosystems GmbH - Sitz: D-22967 Tremsbüttel
Handelsregister: Amtsgericht Ahrensburg HRB 4508
Geschäftsführung: Hermann Thaele, Lüder-H.Thaele



-------------------------------------------------------------------------
SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services
for just about anything Open Source.
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;164216239;13503038;w?http://sf.net/marketplace
_______________________________________________
eGroupWare-core mailing list
eGroupWare-core@...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/egroupware-core

[jaytraxx]

Hi all,

let me share my feelings about that:

Apart from any technical issue, I think the voting would have really damaging consequences for the future of eGW, so my vote will be also -> NULL.

Furthermore I really have to re-think my contributing to the project if very,very valuable people like Lars and Conny get kicked out of the project that way. Yes, you could say "it's their own decision", but if working together is soooo hard in eGW, they are forced to make those decisions and with votings like that you push them in the wrong direction. They already changed their name. Where is the problem for eGW?

Metaways currently pays three fulltime-devels for evaluating things we currently just dream of (and if we are honest, had one of us really time to evaluate dojo or extJS? No.) My attempt of implementing dragNdrop has been really poor. Fine ! I'm happy that people with knowledge and time do it better. So, please ....  LET THEM DO THEIR WORK and let us all be a bit more "open-minded". And yes, maybe it's hard to re-integrate that idea into eGW. Maybe it's really impossible. But where is the damage? None. But it's a piece of chance that will be offered for the whole project, so my appeal for you is to support these guys and not kick them out that way.

I also request the admins to think about the large amount of contributions Conny and Lars have given to the project and how valuable eGW got with that. I don't want to have an eGW in future with just one full-time devel and persons like me, who just contribute if they find time. That's not an acceptable background for enterprises and I often have to think of that if persons ask me if they should switch to eGroupware.

Admins: please do what you can to keep eGW worthy and don't divide it into weak chunks of "believers of the one and worthiest code". Keep your mind free from struggles of the past, you're professionals. I think, the biggest benefit, for Stylite AND Metaways, will result if we work together.

So, please cancel that vote in order to express your liberality to people who want to improve eGW !!!

Bye
Christian

Ralf Becker-3 wrote:

Hi Carsten,

Carsten Wolff schrieb:
> Hi.
>
> My vote is: NULL
> (because either choice makes me sad)

Me too, thought there's not always a happy ending :-(

> I only read egroupware-core. Maybe that's the reason why all this sounds so
> familiar to me. Once again I'm thinking "What the hell is going on? Why is
> everybody so unreasonable?" and once again I have the feeling, that more
> things happened behind the scenes, than a reader of this list gets.

The core list, is the last frequented one. There's more information on
the developer or the German list.

> I'm tired of the fights in this project, that result in either forks or loss
> of manpower, a ressource, eGW is short of anyway. I know I'm not the biggest
> contributor and my word may not weigh very much, but I hope, everyone will
> recognize that this is a free software project. If you want to try changing
> big parts of the code and rewrite the UI, just open a branch in svn. Call it
> make_it_cool or whatever and hack away. Don't register Domains named after
> the next major version for a proof of concept and on the other hand don't

Nicely said :-)

> bash people who want to experiment on new ways of doing things. Be nice to

I dont think we, the admins, are bashing at people.

We have no problem with someone experimenting or trying out new ways, eg.
- create a new UI for 4 core apps, still usable via the existing UI
- write a new API based on the Zend Framework, offering the existing
interfaces

We have a problem with the magnitude of the approach and it's dogma: no
existing code should be able to run in the new environment. Of cause we
also have a problem announcing it as the future or next version, without
any consensus, as you already mentioned it.

I dont want to state all arguments again, as they are already on the
lists in a manageable number of threads.

> each other, make compromise and in the end, if you can not decide on a
> technology to use together, let the users decide over time which approach
> will be ultimately more successful.

You can NOT say, we have not tried with a compromise ...

I'm fine letting the users decide over time, they will do it anyway.

Ralf
--
Ralf Becker
eGroupWare Training & Support ==> http://www.egroupware-support.de
Outdoor Unlimited Training GmbH [www.outdoor-training.de]
Handelsregister HRB Kaiserslautern 3587
Geschäftsführer Birgit und Ralf Becker
Leibnizstr. 17, 67663 Kaiserslautern, Germany
Telefon [phone]

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services
for just about anything Open Source.
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;164216239;13503038;w?http://sf.net/marketplace
_______________________________________________
eGroupWare-core mailing list
[e-mail]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/egroupware-core

[Lars Kneschke-2]

"Ralf Becker" <RalfBecker@...> schrieb:
> We have a problem with the magnitude of the approach and it's dogma: no
> existing code should be able to run in the new environment.
Ralf, you know it better. We never stated this and there is absolutely no
technical reason to do this.

> Of cause we
> also have a problem announcing it as the future or next version, without
> any consensus, as you already mentioned it.
Please don't forget that we tried to find consensus with you and Nigel from
Stylite about 1,5 days long. You and Nigel have been against any consensus.

--
Lars Kneschke
CTO OfficeSpot.Net
Metaways Infosystems GmbH
Pickhuben 2-4, D-20457 Hamburg

eGroupWare Support: http://www.egroupware-support.net
OfficeSpot.Net Collaboration Server: http://cs.officespot.net
our proposal for the next major eGroupWare release: http://www.tine20.org

E-Mail: mailto:l.kneschke@...
Web: http://www.metaways.de
Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Mobile: [phone]

Metaways Infosystems GmbH - Sitz: D-22967 Tremsbüttel
Handelsregister: Amtsgericht Ahrensburg HRB 4508
Geschäftsführung: Hermann Thaele, Lüder-H.Thaele



-------------------------------------------------------------------------
SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services
for just about anything Open Source.
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;164216239;13503038;w?http://sf.net/marketplace
_______________________________________________
eGroupWare-core mailing list
eGroupWare-core@...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/egroupware-core

[Lars Kneschke-2]

"Carsten Wolff" <carsten.wolff@...> schrieb:
> Don't register Domains named after the next major version for a proof of
concept.

You are right.

When we were talking about the name, we thought about the web 2.0 thing. And
that's exactly what we are doing. Mixing eGroupWare with web 2.0
technologies. eGroupWare 2.0 was just a logical name.

As we are not fixed to this name, we also already changed the name for our
proof of concept to "tine 2.0" last monday.

--
Lars Kneschke
CTO OfficeSpot.Net
Metaways Infosystems GmbH
Pickhuben 2-4, D-20457 Hamburg

eGroupWare Support: http://www.egroupware-support.net
OfficeSpot.Net Collaboration Server: http://cs.officespot.net
our proposal for the next major eGroupWare release: http://www.tine20.org

E-Mail: mailto:l.kneschke@...
Web: http://www.metaways.de
Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Mobile: [phone]

Metaways Infosystems GmbH - Sitz: D-22967 Tremsbüttel
Handelsregister: Amtsgericht Ahrensburg HRB 4508
Geschäftsführung: Hermann Thaele, Lüder-H.Thaele



-------------------------------------------------------------------------
SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services
for just about anything Open Source.
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;164216239;13503038;w?http://sf.net/marketplace
_______________________________________________
eGroupWare-core mailing list
eGroupWare-core@...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/egroupware-core

[Lutz Falkenburg (irrsinn.de gmbh)]

But you are no admin. I think the actual admins doing great.

irrsinn.de gmbh
Im Dorfe 38
99489 Hottelstedt

Fon: 036452/18954
Fax: [phone]

http://www.irrsinn.de
eMail: info@...

Eingetragen beim AG Jena HRB 113980
Geschäftsführer: Lutz Falkenburg

IT-Antiquariat mit Garantie: http://www.irrsinn.de/shop
40.000 Artikel vorrätig: http://www.irrsinn.liefert-es.com
Wir beseitigen E-Müll: http://www.defendix.net

Am 14.12.2007 um 09:36 schrieb Lars Kneschke:

> "Miles Lott" <milos@...> schrieb:
>> I just wanted to say that I really appreciate your email and cannot
>> disagree with any of it.  However, we are already past the point  
>> where
>> there is any movement in negotiation.
> It's really sad that you reached that point, before getting in  
> contact with
> us directly.
>
>
>> The idea that anyone in the
>> project or outside of it can put themselves out as the next  
>> generation
>> of development without working with those within the project in an
>> official and organized manner seems to me to be anarchy, and I am  
>> not in
>> favor of that.  There must be organization, especially in such
>> large-scale endeavors.
> You totally ignore the fact, that we stated multiple times, that it  
> was not
> our intention to do this. If you still don't know why we did it,  
> feel free
> to get in contact with us.
>
> I would have acted different as admin.
>
>
> --
> Lars Kneschke
> CTO OfficeSpot.Net
> Metaways Infosystems GmbH
> Pickhuben 2-4, D-20457 Hamburg
>
> eGroupWare Support: http://www.egroupware-support.net
> OfficeSpot.Net Collaboration Server: http://cs.officespot.net
> our proposal for the next major eGroupWare release: http://www.tine20.org
>
> E-Mail: mailto:l.kneschke@...
> Web: http://www.metaways.de
> Tel: [phone]
> Fax: [phone]
> Mobile: [phone]
>
> Metaways Infosystems GmbH - Sitz: D-22967 Tremsbüttel
> Handelsregister: Amtsgericht Ahrensburg HRB 4508
> Geschäftsführung: Hermann Thaele, Lüder-H.Thaele
>
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> SF.Net email is sponsored by:
> Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
> It's the best place to buy or sell services
> for just about anything Open Source.
> http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;164216239;13503038;w?http://sf.net/marketplace
> _______________________________________________
> eGroupWare-core mailing list
> eGroupWare-core@...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/egroupware-core

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services
for just about anything Open Source.
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;164216239;13503038;w?http://sf.net/marketplace
_______________________________________________
eGroupWare-core mailing list
eGroupWare-core@...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/egroupware-core

[Oscar Manuel Gómez Senovilla]

"Lars Kneschke" <l.kneschke@...> escribió:

> "Oscar Manuel Gómez Senovilla" <omgs@...> schrieb:
>> Why not allow the Metaways developers keep *investigating* in extjs (or
>> whatever) as long as they change the domain (which they already did) but
>> don't bind it in any way to egw? What will happen only time within some
>> months will decide, but trying to exclude it *right now* I think it's an
>> error. I also think it's a mistake trying to decide *right now* that
>> "tine" is *the only* way for future egw, apart from not allowing any
>> kind of compliance with current egw api. Maybe in, let's say, one year,
>> current egw api uses some new api/framework/whatever that makes possible
>> to reach a common intermediate point that, if the tine team still keeps
>> developing and on their belief for unique possible way, at least there's
>> a way to reach integration. And if not in one year, in two years, then
>> three, etc. And maybe the current egw framework has found another way
>> that's even more powerful than others. The summary is that everything
>> can happen in the future in any of both sides.
>
> Hello Oscar!

Hi, Lars.

> Just to state it again, as many developers still did not understand what
we
> are doing.
>
> In the summer we sat together with Ralf, try to talk with him about our
> ideas, how Cornelius and I like to improve the CURRENT codebase of
> eGroupWare. At this time Cornelius was not a Metaways employee and it was
> also never planed that he will become one. At this meeting Ralf and Nigel
> Vickers from Stylite denied any of our requests how to we liked to improve
> the CURRENT codebase of eGroupWare. Because Ralf and Nigel denied any of
our
> ideas, we have started our own codebase on our own servers.
>
> Now we are working on a proof of concept, how we think eGroupWare can work
> and look like in the future. This will allow the other developers in the
> project to decide themself, if our ideas are good or not. This proof of
> concept is limited to 4 applications and will have no backward
> compatibility. It's a proof of concept. When we have finished the proof of
> concept(scheduled for the first quarter 2008) and we like to have a vote,
if
> the other developers like our codebase or not. If the other developers
like
> our codebase, we can start thinking about how we can add
> backwardcompatibility and we can start talking about a longterm migration
> path. We are working for eGroupWare not against.


I'm very glad to hear/read this. From my point of view, it looks like there
has been a big misunderstanding. I understood that, apart from no backwards
compatibility, there was no intention to provide such, and I think we all
agree that's a stopper.


I think that like me, many (most? the rest?) of the developers understood
your proof this way. Personally, I asked about having to learn js to keep
developing and the idea I got with your reply is in the way "forget php and
embrace js if you want to develop for egw", instead of something like "we're
just trying to enhance the ui to look more attractive an useful to the user"
maybe followed by "we'll see in the future how we can make our proof
compatible with the egw api".


>From this point of view, and if I understand correctly, the vote is not
stupid, just nonsense. Let's not blame on any of Ralf/Nigel/... nor
Lars/Connie/... sides and take this positively to keep up the good work and
open mind *on both sides*.


Regards.



-------------------------------------------------------------------------
SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services
for just about anything Open Source.
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;164216239;13503038;w?http://sf.net/marketplace
_______________________________________________
eGroupWare-core mailing list
eGroupWare-core@...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/egroupware-core

[Lars Kneschke-2]

"Oscar Manuel Gómez Senovilla" <omgs@...> schrieb:
> I think that like me, many (most? the rest?) of the developers understood
> your proof this way. Personally, I asked about having to learn js to keep
> developing and the idea I got with your reply is in the way "forget php
and
> embrace js if you want to develop for egw", instead of something like
"we're
> just trying to enhance the ui to look more attractive an useful to the
user"
> maybe followed by "we'll see in the future how we can make our proof
> compatible with the egw api".
Maybe I was to unclear. But have a look at the getting started posted by
Thomas yesterday.

http://www.tine20.org/wiki/index.php/Getting_started_with_ExtJS_and_Zend_Framework

This page should give you a very good overview about what's needed, if we
ever start working with a JavaScript framework in the future.


>>From this point of view, and if I understand correctly, the vote is not
> stupid, just nonsense. Let's not blame on any of Ralf/Nigel/... nor
> Lars/Connie/... sides and take this positively to keep up the good work
and
> open mind *on both sides*.
I'm really open person. I have absolutely no problem ignoring our current
problems, working together with Ralf, Pim or Miles to find a solution.

But the thing with Nigel I can not ignore.

--
Lars Kneschke
CTO OfficeSpot.Net
Metaways Infosystems GmbH
Pickhuben 2-4, D-20457 Hamburg

eGroupWare Support: http://www.egroupware-support.net
OfficeSpot.Net Collaboration Server: http://cs.officespot.net
our proposal for the next major eGroupWare release: http://www.tine20.org

E-Mail: mailto:l.kneschke@...
Web: http://www.metaways.de
Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Mobile: [phone]

Metaways Infosystems GmbH - Sitz: D-22967 Tremsbüttel
Handelsregister: Amtsgericht Ahrensburg HRB 4508
Geschäftsführung: Hermann Thaele, Lüder-H.Thaele



-------------------------------------------------------------------------
SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services
for just about anything Open Source.
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;164216239;13503038;w?http://sf.net/marketplace
_______________________________________________
eGroupWare-core mailing list
eGroupWare-core@...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/egroupware-core

[Milosch]

Lars Kneschke wrote:

"Miles Lott" milos@... schrieb:
  

I just wanted to say that I really appreciate your email and cannot 
disagree with any of it.  However, we are already past the point where 
there is any movement in negotiation.  
    

It's really sad that you reached that point, before getting in contact with
us directly.

  

Our intention was to keep this public and allow everyone time to reply to our original statement.  You had not replied except to say that there was not enough time to meet our demands.  But, we did not demand, nor was there a real expectation of compliance within that time frame.  I mean, seriously... The expectation was that a dialog would begin, and within a certain framework - that being our statement.  We were looking for answers and do not feel like waiting until you are ready before we can try to resolve this.

The idea that anyone in the 
project or outside of it can put themselves out as the next generation 
of development without working with those within the project in an 
official and organized manner seems to me to be anarchy, and I am not in 
favor of that.  There must be organization, especially in such 
large-scale endeavors.
    

You totally ignore the fact, that we stated multiple times, that it was not
our intention to do this. If you still don't know why we did it, feel free
to get in contact with us.

  

Again, you have had plenty of time to respond to our statement.  There is absolutely no problem with the fact of your new development.  The problem is that you are doing your development outside of the project, which makes it essentially another project.  If that was not your intention, then please remedy the situation.

I think it would be better for you to return, but this cannot be 100% on your terms.  Who's next, and how would we be expected to deal with another similar effort operating in this manner?  It doesn't matter to me who is doing it, whether they are core developers or not.

I would have acted different as admin.
  

I have no doubt that you would have acted differently.  But it is hard to say until you are in that position.  I am in that position.  This is currently how I am contributing to the project.  It would serve us both to keep the discussion as impersonal as possible.  Allow me to speak for myself for a minute:

To me, the administration is more than just a group setup to run the daily operations of egroupware and handle mailing lists, etc.  We are also an entity which can provide a balance along with the developer and user communities.  We can, at best, try to maintain a sense of order within the project.  We are not able to do just what we want.  Nor can any group of developers do whatever they want within the project without balancing their efforts to the wishes of the remainder of the community.  The users also have certain power in deciding whether or not they wish to continue using our software.

Lars, I have no reason to take a personal stance against you.  Please afford me the same courtesy.  I always thought you were a friend in this project and within the other project.  If your server is now accepting my emails, then we can actually have a private discussion as well ;)

As admins, we are each doing our best to do what we feel is right for the project - not what Ralf wants.  Sometimes we agree, and sometimes not.  But, we do actually discuss these things and come to agreement.  If a developer of Ralf's stature was not on the admin team, I think we would appear to be powerless and/or just like another boss to avoid.  Do not forget that we were elected and that we have all had our contributions to the code whether current or in the past.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services
for just about anything Open Source.
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;164216239;13503038;w?http://sf.net/marketplace
_______________________________________________
eGroupWare-core mailing list
eGroupWare-core@...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/egroupware-core