On Sat, 27 Jan 2007, Bo Peng wrote:
I guess Joost is at a better position to comment on this but talking
about whose installer is kind of silly for a GPL project. We have to
call Joost or Uwe's installer because we have two now.
I agree. What we need is to achieve consensus. And I think there should
only be one installer. The simili with LyX core code would be that we have
two classes that does more or less the same thing. One of them should go
or a new, merged class, should be created.
I dislike bundling but as I have said, I can live with it if others
prefer this way. So the problem was not with the installer itself,
rather the inclusion of the installer in the trunk with no obvious
intention to merge with the official one.
I think we should start the discussion from scratch. Maybe now that things
have been vented Uwe and Joost can come to an agreement? Continuing
things in this thread is pointless, it'll just drown in the noise.
My impression is that a majority of the developers are *for* letting
Uwe keep his stuff in SVN, regardless of other issues. (The developers
against would be Bo and possibly Joost).
I did not have this impression, but this is irrelevant. What Uwe
should have done was
1. announce that he would like to put his installer in the trunk
2. I would object but others might not
3. take appropriate action according to the outcome of 2.
Yes, I agree that this would have been better. Hmm... actually.. Uwe might
have asked on the list about this. I don't really remember, but the
response could have been that he should ask Joost first. Then Joost wasn't
responding so Uwe finally got tired of waiting and added it.
It's all water under the bridge now I think, and we're wasting time
discussing it further.
If Uwe is still interested in putting his installer in the trunk, he can
start from 1 now. You have seen many times that I changed my mind after
I announced something like: I will change my mind if I get three
objections (and I usually got enough objections. :-)
I thought it already was in the trunk? Maybe he has removed it.
Yes, I guess that if Uwe wants to keep his code in the trunk, it would be
polite to ask for objections to keeping it. OTOH, maybe the question is
moot now, I don't know. For that matter, as we all hope the
functionality/code/etc will be merged, that might be easier if both code
bases are in the trunk for a while. This is of course what you've said
that you'd find acceptable.
/Christian
--
Christian Ridderström, +46-8-768 39 44 http://www.md.kth.se/~chr
