[Sugar-devel] Private vs Public conversations.

[Gonzalo Odiard]

David,
I agree with James. I never heard something like that, is a big accusation,
and really do not help to move things forward.
As I was in the Sugar team of OLPC Association for the last 3 years,
I am absolutely sure we didn't have any direction about that,
and every decision was based on code quality or other technical reasons.
You may think code is usually accepted "as is", but that is not true.
Almost every significant piece, receive suggestions and change requests,
and after 4 or 5 proposals is accepted when all the requests are fulfilled.

Gonzalo



On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 3:40 AM, James Cameron <quozl at laptop.org> wrote:

> On 29/10/2013, at 11:14 AM, David Farning wrote:
> > As two Data points:
> > In a private conversation with an Association employee they told me
> > that they conciser Activity Central a competitor because Activity
> > Central increased deployments expectations. Their strategy with regard
> > to Activity Central was to _not_ accept patches upstream with the goal
> > of causing Activity Central and Dextrose to collapse under its their
> > weight. As it was private conversation I am not sure how widely spread
> > the opinion was held.
>
> Interesting.  I don't recall hearing this.  If it was a serious concern
> backed by evidence I would have expected to receive a direction on it.  I
> conclude it was speculation and not a formal direction, or it was not
> communicated to me as a direction.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Sugar-devel mailing list
> Sugar-devel at lists.sugarlabs.org
> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.laptop.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20131029/b5e7ec44/attachment.html>