On 1/13/12 12:32 PM, Ross Gardler wrote:
2012/1/13 Jürgen Schmidt<jogischm...@googlemail.com>:
Hi Ross,
sorry for my top posting.
I have only one point that is important for me. The hosting aspect of binary
extensions and templates is a very important part and we should ensure can
we can provide such a service in some way.
Yes, I think we all (including the board) agree. This is evidenced by
their willingness to approve Gavs proposal.
Can you please state explicitly whether you perceive a problem with
the SF proposal or not. It is my understanding that the consensus here
is to accept the SF proposal, it is this that I am seeking advice from
the board on.
yes i support the SF proposal as well.
My point was that in your email to the board this point was not clear
enough for me.
I don't want to open up the whole discussion again,
me too
Juergen
the majority
position is certainly to accept the SF proposal. However, if you feel
this is a mistake I would like to understand you precise concerns so
that I might respond to any questions from the board with maximum
clarity.
Note the proposal taken to the board is for the SF proposal to be an
interim solution with the intention of the AOO project providing a
longer term solution more tailored to the needs of the project and its
users.
Ross
