Hi. Well, using VCS doesn't mean that you are giving away power/leadership of the project. Using VCS means saving a lot of time and being a lot more productive, even if you do not accept any contribution of anybody. I agree with most of your points, but I didn't read any reason against using VCS. I'd love to work 1-2 hours per day on x2go, but NOT on source code that is a couple of months or even years old and send tar.gz through e-mail until the confusion is perfect and nobody knows who's talking about what state/revision of the code. But it is all right if you don't want that free gift. And no, VCS is not just a way to download files that could also be put in a .tar.gz - VCS is the one and only way to make structured open, fast and reliable development possible. If you don't believe me, ask anybody who has worked in a professional software project.
Anyway, this is my last mail on this subject - I have offered you my support and you don't want it for reasons I don't know. Please do not complain if an "x2go-ng" project appears on github in the next few months - I need to help myself and my clients - and well, I have asked you before. Jörg Am Freitag, den 16.07.2010, 12:52 +0200 schrieb Heinz-M. Graesing: > Am 16.07.2010 06:21, schrieb Gerry Reno: > > > > > > And you cannot make an "open core" project out of a derivative of a > > GPL work. The "open core" part has to be in surrounding apps that > > themselves do not link to any GPL code whatsoever. > > > > > > Hello Gerry, > hello list members, > > Please have a look back in time. A few months before there was not much > traffic on this list and we've known every member of our community by > name and face. Our community mainly is and was Linux4Afrika and later > the german branch skolelinux too. > Both projects are known to be aware about what open source is and both > projects have choosen to use x2go. This is because they where able to > modify it to their needs and to adopt own ideas. Upstream in this case > means, that those modifications have been released in their projects, > because the changes have been very specific to their solutions. > Now this situation changes and x2go is getting more popular. But there > are still a huge number of users (schools, institutions and companies) > who rely on x2go and it's compatibility. x2go has its own "history". > Every part of the new relase contains wishes from those and the people > on the list. > x2go has been and will ever be open source software. Furthermore it is > based on existing open source software. This is - in our eyes - the only > way x2go should be developed. Even more there is a vision / a target > which we want to reach some day, which will help a lot of other projects > -> getting the needed nx features realized using a modern xorg version. > The sources have ever been online and will stay there and they are used > by others like the maintainers of other distros (they could not build > their packages if not - f.e. Gentoo). Please don't mix the governance of > a project with the accuse of GPL violation. > We can't answer every email on the list, but we are reading it. And if > you follow the development of x2go, you'll see that there is a big > accordance between the wishes / bugreports and the features of a new > release. > I would suggest we should discuss the idea of drawing a line between > "mainstream", "contributions" and maybe "spins". We will definitly go on > developing x2go (mainstream) as a to itself compatible and complete > project. We will accept contributions in this branch, but they should be > > * in the mind of "the whole" idea of x2go (a server based computing > environment) > * not be destroying work already done > * maintainable by more than the submitting person > * usable for more than one specific use case only > * helping to make it possible to use recent xorg versions with the > nxlibs features > * helping to get x2go inside debian > > And (again): > > PLEASE use the list as communication tool! I received a lot of emails > about this topic in my private inbox. Keep your answers polite and help > this discussion to be productive. > > It would be nice to ask some questions first, before publishing your own > truth. For example: > > Why do you publish your code as tar.gz archive inside your repository? > > Sure there are tools on this earth that make some things easier. But not > using this tools don't means "forbidding" something like contributions. > John has already used the list for this purpose and as far as I know it > is already used by other users. We will use our online git as planned > and we'll always thankfully awaiting patches and contributions. > > To get back on the "communication issue": As far as I know "we" (or > anybody else) never had communicate a final result about "how open x2go > is". So this discussion needs to be done before accusing this project to > be "what ever the result will be". > > If you like to help other projects than x2go, please help them by > contributing and not by boycott this on. Nobody is forced to use x2go > and everybody can do whatever he want's to do as he can access the code. > > Regards, > > Alex & Heinz > > > > > _______________________________________________ > X2go-dev mailing list > X2go-dev@lists.berlios.de > https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/x2go-dev _______________________________________________ X2go-dev mailing list X2go-dev@lists.berlios.de https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/x2go-dev