Re: [Phpgroupware-developers] Re: Serious PHPGroupware

[Dan Kuykendall]

Miles Lott wrote:
> I reckon I am feeling fiesty as well.  But that's not a great leap
> for me as you may know.  BTW, I am now solely an outside observer of
> this project. 

I want to thank you for all the effort your have put into the project 
over the years. It is not secret that you and I have not always gotten 
along and we have had some rather bitter battles amoungst ourselves 
(which is one of the reasons I stayed away for awhile). However, your 
contribution to the project will always be remembered and appreciated. I 
wish your new project all the sucess in the world as well as yourself in 
general. Good bye and farewell.



Now for a little reply to what was said in the remainder of this email....

> Sorry, no further details from me in this forum.

<fake_cough>  http://www.milosch.net/mgp/  </fake_cough>

> Anyway, I will also take the bait.
>
> Dan Kuykendall wrote:
>
> > As far as handing it off, who has even shown a tiny bit of the
> > leadership to take over the project? If I saw someone who wanted and
> > showed that they could run it better and put more energy into the
> > project, then the rest of the developers would naturally follow behind
> > this person. I do not "own" the project, I am just do what I can to help
>
> The project is not his to hand off, unless the rest of the remaining
> 'core team' allow it.  Glad to see you finally state this fact.

I have been very public about the change to the "core team" change we 
did last year.

> BTW, I may not be a leader, but I understand well the importance of a
> dissenting opinion.  I also understand the importance of not throwing
> molitov cocktails into the code base.

Just because I ignored your opinion doesnt mean you should get all 
pissed off <hehehe>
Now seriously, I am not perfect with this, but I honestly do my best to 
listen to others ideas and take all of them into consideration. But I 
will agree that this is something I can continue to grow in.

> > Dont forget that a year ago it became clear that my new job was not
> > going to allow me as much time for the project, so I stopped being the
> > single "leader" of the project and instead we switched to a coreteam of
> > five that were the "leadership team". Even then things havent picked up
> > because everyones time tends to get cut into by other responsibilities.
>
> Let's not confuse everyone.  It was not your decision to create the core
> leadership team.

At the time it was not my idea to do this... it was yours. But it was my 
decision. I could have forced you guys to fork the project since I do 
own the domain, and controlled the sourceforge project and all that. If 
I remember correctly I would have had Jengos support as well.

> In fact you fought it tooth and nail.

Again, this is not true. I fought YOU tooth and nail, but I understood 
that I could not run the project on my own and that something needed to 
be done.

> I cannot
> explain why people continue to follow you, but that is their choice.

hehe... I cant explain this either... But I am glad that they do and 
that I have be apart of such an amazing project

> > > just to understand
> > > where the project is going and in what time frame.  It's a great project
> > > with alot of potential that I feel is stifled in a pre-1.0 state for
> > > some unknown set of reasons.
>
> Those reasons were primarily a ridiculously long release schedule
> brought
> about in part by the following (as stated above):  jengo's hiatus,
> dan's,
> skeeter's, ceb's, and my irl jobs.  That and the bickering about the
> email
> app, gif vs. png, and the coreteam arrangement.  Oh, and the fact that i
> am too rough on new developers, so they say.

Yes, there have been many reasons. Free Software projects which are lead 
and developed by volunteers are not able to depend on having an idea 
development and release cycle. Just how it works out.

> > I agree that this is a great project and this pre-1.0 crap needs to end.
> > I have made it known several times over the last two months that I
> > intend that the next release be 1.0. Here is an email I sent out a few
> > weeks ago. I have more to follow up on this and will send out more about
> > this later.
>
> What is clear is that you 'intend' to make something happen via public
> opinion
> instead of by way of the voting standard which was agreed upon.
>  This is
> not
> a shock to me.  Again, I cannot explain why the others seem to fall in
> line.
> Maybe they don't, but it is hard to tell when they are largely silent.

You have said yourself over the last few months and in the above lines 
that the core team is not really working out for various reasons. So 
public opinion is what is left to me as well as my own development 
goals. Hopefully the coreteam will be able to get back together and get 
things moving along again.

I have been active again and doing lots of development work in the 
background with some new ideas. I will be putting some more of these in 
CVS over the next couple of days in hopes that this project can get some 
new life and vigor. Right now phpGW basicly works very well and we need 
new ideas and new developer blood to make it more interesting.

I have taken a good healthy break from the project and am all fired up 
about development. So all this bikkering aside, I see a great future for 
phpGW.

Seek3r