On 5 November 2010 11:07, Fernando Cassia <fcas...@gmail.com> wrote: (...)
> It´s easy to take the bulk of well-written code developer over a > decade and then "evolve" it with just a couple dozen developers, > adding minor features and patches after each minor release number. > > The truth will be seen when both LO and OpenOffice.org start diverging > and when Oracle decides to put several hundred developers to work on > the next major version number full time, if Ubuntu/Fedora and hobbyist > programmers in their spare time can match it. It´ll be fun to watch, > but I surely think the forking wasn´t needed, and it was cause because > of politcs, FUD, and paranoia. > Most forks are done because of (internal or external) project politics and governance issues. The XFree/X.org one would be a fine example if you'd care to do any research before posting your scaremongering rants. "That´s the way OSS works" seems to be an excuse to fork, fork, fork. > Has anyone heard of "Iceweasel" lately?. No, everyone refers to it by > Mozilla.org´s name.... > That's another example of how finely tuned your reality distortion device is. Debian's Icewasel never was a fork, was not intended to be a fork and the rebranding was forced down the Debian developers' throats after Mozilla (Corp.) decided to unilaterally change their policies. Also, you seem to be perpetuating here the 'FLOSS is done by amateur programmers in their spare time' myth; again, you might want to educate yourself before making such claims. Have a nice life, Jubal
-- users mailing list users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
