discuss: LDP Incorporate ?
Subject:
LDP Incorporate ?
From:
David Lawyer ####@####.####
Date:
5 Nov 2007 06:59:25 +0000
Message-Id: <20071105065849.GC1875@davespc>
On Sun, Nov 04, 2007 at 11:05:49PM -0700, Charles Curley wrote:
> Furthermore, it's rather pathetic to see Mr. Lawyer make an
> interesting, reasonable proposal, then sabotage the discussion of it
> by hijacking the thread into yet another interminable rehash of
> LinuxDoc.
The threads are not hijacked. They are forked.
>
> Can we return to the original proposal?
Yes. I wanted some more responses to the proposal of incorporating by
putting ourselves under the umbrella of "Software in the Public
Interest". As soon as I replied to the posts re LinuxDoc and the
posts re translations, (and appropriately changed the subjects) I
intended to post an appeal for discussion of the original proposal.
This is it. So we now have 3 threads going which is more activity
than we've seen in a while" LinuxDoc-DocBook, translations, and
incorporation. All are important but the incorporation is the most
important IMO.
However, these posts about DocBook vs LinuxDoc and translations were
valid since they do relate to incorporating in a way. If we
incorporate we could use "Volunteer Match" and we would likely get
some volunteers. I don't agree that we should suggest that they do
translations nor suggest that they convert docs to DocBook. There are
plenty of other tasks to do which are being neglected and are, in my
opinion, much more important. I didn't expect that this would be so
controversial.
So what do you think? Should I approach SPI and ask them to take us
in? Does someone else want to do it? If we don't do this, what do
you suggest we do to get the volunteers that we sorely need?
David Lawyer
