On Sun, Nov 04, 2007 at 11:05:49PM -0700, Charles Curley
wrote:
> Furthermore, it's rather pathetic to see Mr. Lawyer
make an
> interesting, reasonable proposal, then sabotage the
discussion of it
> by hijacking the thread into yet another interminable
rehash of
> LinuxDoc.
The threads are not hijacked. They are forked.
>
> Can we return to the original proposal?
Yes. I wanted some more responses to the proposal of
incorporating by
putting ourselves under the umbrella of "Software in
the Public
Interest". As soon as I replied to the posts re
LinuxDoc and the
posts re translations, (and appropriately changed the
subjects) I
intended to post an appeal for discussion of the original
proposal.
This is it. So we now have 3 threads going which is more
activity
than we've seen in a while" LinuxDoc-DocBook,
translations, and
incorporation. All are important but the incorporation is
the most
important IMO.
However, these posts about DocBook vs LinuxDoc and
translations were
valid since they do relate to incorporating in a way. If
we
incorporate we could use "Volunteer Match" and we
would likely get
some volunteers. I don't agree that we should suggest that
they do
translations nor suggest that they convert docs to DocBook.
There are
plenty of other tasks to do which are being neglected and
are, in my
opinion, much more important. I didn't expect that this
would be so
controversial.
So what do you think? Should I approach SPI and ask them to
take us
in? Does someone else want to do it? If we don't do this,
what do
you suggest we do to get the volunteers that we sorely
need?
David Lawyer
______________________
http://lists.tldp.org/
|