On 5 May 2016 at 13:16, John Clark <inin...@gmail.com> wrote: >>Could you elaborate more and explain how exactly LEDE is going to fix > the listed problems? And why it's not possible to fix them inside > existing project? > > The hasty reasons given and the secret and abrupt severing of ties make me > wonder if a "follow the money" approach will yield more plausible answers to > the questions being raised.
maybe a good point, how do you "follow the money"? > On Thu, May 5, 2016 at 5:34 AM, Roman Yeryomin <leroi.li...@gmail.com> > wrote: >> >> On 5 May 2016 at 06:48, Daniel Dickinson <open...@daniel.thecshore.com> >> wrote: >> > On 16-05-04 04:01 PM, mbm wrote: >> >> Dear OpenWrt community, >> >> >> >> spin off the OpenWrt project in the first place as a way to fix the >> >> project and its community. Also, the phrases such as a "reboot" are >> >> both >> >> vague and misleading and the LEDE project failed to identify its true >> >> nature. The LEDE announcement contains a number of very valid points >> > >> > Can you be more specific about what you believe is LEDE's 'true nature'? >> > >> >> which we hoped we had an opportunity to discuss and attempt to fix, in >> >> a >> >> public manner, before this more radical outcome. At this point, the >> >> email as well as actions taken are very confusing to a lot of us. >> > >> > This is a guess: perhaps it is connected to the fact that Felix's >> > n...@openwrt.org address now bounces, and that actions were taken which >> > were deemed to be over-the-top by the LEDE team? Certainly there is a >> > great deal more doing on that either side is saying in public (which >> > might be just as well since there seems to be a fair amount of bad >> > feelings on both sides). >> >> One simple question: >> If LEDE team members are the ones who were suffering from some >> non-democratic decisions, why didn't they bring it to public >> discussion for community? At least on devel maillist? >> >> If it was clear problem in remaining OpenWrt team then LEDE would win >> the community right away or maybe problematic people would just go >> away. Either way it would be more fair and open. And this is one of my >> biggest concerns - LEDE team is promoting openness but didn't do their >> moves openly (looking at maillists it seems they were hiding it for >> month at least). Hate double standards. >> >> >> >> We do acknowledge there has been internal disagreements, on several >> >> occasions about some directions of the project, about the release >> >> model, >> >> the lack of testing, the centralized infrastructure, however, there >> >> have >> >> been actual work going on under the hoods to solve things one step at a >> > >> > Perhaps 'under-the-hood' is the problem. Did everyone with concerns >> > know or have insight into what steps were currently being taken and what >> > was planned, and have planned actions been followed through on, once >> > *agreed* as a solution? >> > >> > Also, is the decision making process egalitarian and democratic amongst >> > those still actively in the project, or are some 'more equal' than >> > others? >> > >> > Regards, >> > >> > Daniel >> > _______________________________________________ >> > openwrt-devel mailing list >> > openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org >> > https://lists.openwrt.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel >> _______________________________________________ >> openwrt-devel mailing list >> openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org >> https://lists.openwrt.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel > > > > _______________________________________________ > openwrt-devel mailing list > openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org > https://lists.openwrt.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel > _______________________________________________ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
