Hi, On Do 06 Jan 2011 21:44:35 CET Klaus Knopper wrote:
So I started to give GOsa a try. One of the main reasons for me was the use of available software and the idea that a project with limited manpower should focus its coding activities on stuff that's special to the goals (school specific stuff) and not already solved elsewhere (general system- and user-administration). Further more, I hoped to use features like FAI which allows more flexibility for schools which want to customize their setup individually at a later stage. In the meantime, I changed my view a bit. It looks like GOsa is only seen as a temporary solution by a majority of the project. (Of course, taking this attitude leads to a limping integration, nobody is interested in polishing and improving the setup, it's perhaps even kind of spoiled by demanding 'compatibility with other solutions', which in turn leads to the fact that everybody handles it like something you don't like but can't get rid of (yet)). So if you ask me, I think as long as I am the only one supporting GOsa, it will go away as soon as there is a working alternative available.Thanks for sharing your thoughts about this. So, it is probably not a good idea for us to either put any effort into GOsa integration of our tools, since it is "temporary", right?
To me this feels like I digged out quite an issue here... It may be good to come together on e.g. IRC and discuss a common strategy on this, doesn't it?
It surely does not feel like making any sense if people code into different directions without focusing on a common intention.
Greets, Mike -- DAS-NETZWERKTEAM mike gabriel, dorfstr. 27, 24245 barmissen fon: +49 (4302) 281418, fax: +49 (4302) 281419 GnuPG Key ID 0x1943CA5B mail: m.gabr...@das-netzwerkteam.de, http://das-netzwerkteam.de freeBusy: https://mail.das-netzwerkteam.de/freebusy/m.gabriel%40das-netzwerkteam.de.xfb
pgpbB2hL3jOTP.pgp
Description: Digitale PGP-Unterschrift
