What's the story on that? From the sound of it, the "GNOME Good 'ol Boys" have already made up their mind about some key GNOME decisions, so why are we even bothering pretending this is gonna be a democratic process? I'm confused about how the role of the GNOME Foundation mixes with the private core developer mailing list mentioned in this article.
-- What did you eat today? http://www.atetoday.com/
Re:So what's this I hear about AbiWord?
by
miguel
·
· Score: 5
The reporter you quote there chose to "selectively" quote Dom, and "selectively" quote Havoc.
Although both wanted to convey a different story, the reporter chose to push forward his own agenda. You can mail Dom and ask him, and you can mail Havoc and ask him.
You can read the archives of the gnome-office-list where the discussion and a complete explanation can be found:
What an amazingly biased and sexist statement! Let me get this straight - you're recommending we vote for a candidate purely on the basis of their gender? That is absolutely the worst way of deciding who to appoint. You didn't mention what qualifications this woman has, or why she would be a better choice than any of the other candidates. Have the last hunderd years of the Women's Rights movement not taught you that it should be ability that matters, not gender? How very disappointing.
Slashdot Mirror
LWN highlighted an article that I'm surprised didn't get posted to slashdot:
http://www. zdn et.com/enterprise/stories/main/0,10228,2644950,00. html
What's the story on that? From the sound of it, the "GNOME Good 'ol Boys" have already made up their mind about some key GNOME decisions, so why are we even bothering pretending this is gonna be a democratic process? I'm confused about how the role of the GNOME Foundation mixes with the private core developer mailing list mentioned in this article.
What did you eat today? http://www.atetoday.com/
What an amazingly biased and sexist statement! Let me get this straight - you're recommending we vote for a candidate purely on the basis of their gender? That is absolutely the worst way of deciding who to appoint. You didn't mention what qualifications this woman has, or why she would be a better choice than any of the other candidates. Have the last hunderd years of the Women's Rights movement not taught you that it should be ability that matters, not gender? How very disappointing.