Technology continues to march forward. Some people find it hard to keep up.
-Adrian --- On Thu, 1/20/11, David E Jones <d...@me.com> wrote: > Before saying anything else, let me clarify that I don't > disagree with this sentiment. > > The big question seems to be what is the "clue" that > everyone wishes the PMC has? > > Personally, I now disagree with the whole model and doubt > any redemption for it. Even if there were perfect people on > the PMC (which is clearly impossible, and the current PMC is > mostly made up of attempts to do anything to get as many > people involved as possible): when there is no design to > implement to and the scope is not very narrowly defined it > is impossible to keep everyone happy. That's why most ASF > projects are not like OFBiz with broad scope and business > focus and a lot of design to be done, they are generally > implementations of public specifications. > > Is that the clue? > > Maybe a better question is: what is the dream world people > think they are going to find here? > > Why is anyone surprised? > > Well, for those interested the model I'm going for now is > quite different, see the "Model: License? Resources?" > section on the www.moqui.org web site. > > That said, I mentioned above that I don't disagree with the > sentiment. However, I think it is presented in a piss poor > way by everyone who is acting like a whining little child > here. Get a life. If it's a big deal to you then solve the > problem and stop complaining and whining. Get a grip on > reality. There are all sorts of things you could do about > this that don't require trying to push the project. Anyone > could grab the old theme and post it to any of dozens of > free hosting places, or just on a wiki page or Jira issue. > People could even collaborate to reduce the burden on any > individual. This isn't rocket science. > > This is what is so ridiculous. Almost no one cares about > handling general needs over specific ones and keeping things > flexible. Almost no one cares about what anyone else needs. > And why should it be any different? Those who think things > should be a certain or another just want a free ride and > won't lift a finger beyond childish complaints and personal > attacks to get anything done. This sort of situation is > EXACTLY what should be expected in this model. > > Still, there are solutions to all of this and rewards for > those creative and hard-working enough to get them done. > There is pretty much always a solution once the real problem > is confessed. There's also a market out there for pretty > much anything related to this, since currently there aren't > many people using some sort of violence to stop any of this. > That's the beauty of the real world. > > -David > > > On Jan 20, 2011, at 7:38 PM, Ruth Hoffman wrote: > > > Yeah you do...live in a vacuum. IMHO and experience > the PMC does live in a vacuum. As the saying goes...you guys > "don't have a clue". > > Just my 2 cents. > > Ruth > > > > On 1/20/11 9:56 PM, Adrian Crum wrote: > >> That's not true. Every change is discussed and > debated. > >> > >> The OFBiz developers and the PMC don't live in a > vacuum - they have production systems to maintain. It is > silly to think they would not consider those production > systems when proposing changes. > >> > >> -Adrian > >> > >> --- On Thu, 1/20/11, BJ Freeman<bjf...@free-man.net> > wrote: > >>> you will find that the ofbiz > >>> developer group first priority is to change > >>> before considering the effect on production > systemm using > >>> offbiz. > >>> something I lobby against, but has little > effect. > >>> so I have a system to accomplish this > regardless of what > >>> they do. > >>> > >>> > >>> ========================= > >>> BJ Freeman > >>> Strategic Power Office with Supplier > Automation > >>> <http://www.businessesnetwork.com/automation/viewforum.php?f=52> > >>> Specialtymarket.com<http://www.specialtymarket.com/> > >>> Systems Integrator-- Glad to Assist > >>> > >>> Chat Y! messenger: bjfr33man > >>> > >>> > >>> Mike sent the following on 1/20/2011 3:38 PM: > >>>> But why delete it? Alot of folks > learned ofbiz > >>> on flatgrey, and their > >>>> employees are used to it. At least > keep it > >>> around as flatgrey_old. > >>>> On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 3:30 PM, Adrian > Crum<adri...@hlmksw.com> > >>> wrote: > >>>>> That theme was starting to look old, > so the > >>> developer community decided to > >>>>> update it. > >>>>> > >>>>> If you prefer the old version of the > theme, you > >>> are welcome to replace the > >>>>> new one with it. > >>>>> > >>>>> -Adrian > >>>>> > >>>>> On 1/20/2011 3:21 PM, Mike wrote: > >>>>>> I just loaded trunk and discovered > that the > >>> normal flatgrey theme has > >>>>>> been completely redefined. > What > >>> happened? I thought it was actually > >>>>>> the best theme that was very well > >>> organized. Is there a way to get it > >>>>>> back? > >>>>>> > >>> > >> > >> > >> > >
