[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[Fsfe-uk] Re: AFFS workings

From: Alex Hudson
Subject: [Fsfe-uk] Re: AFFS workings
Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2005 11:11:18 +0100

On Wed, 2005-06-29 at 10:05 +0100, MJ Ray wrote:
> I was flamed about everything from sending too many emails to
> not being "co-operative" enough (which is sort of funny anyway,
> given my business is AFAIK the only one among ctte which acts
> as a co-operative...)  With such a flame-laden start, it's
> not a surprise to me that the end of affs-project came early.
> Where was the list owner while this was going on?

I'm not going to get into an argument, but that description doesn't fit
my recollection of the AFFS-Project list nor my archive of it.
Certainly, in the run up to the last Expo - which was our most
successful Expo by most/any? metric - it was an invaluable resource and
we got a lot of useful stuff done on it. I would like to see
AFFS-Project used in exactly the same manner again.

The archives of AFFS-Project are open to all; rather than inferring
things from what you or I say, I would recommend people actually go and
look at this "flame laden start" and judge it for themselves.

> I think there are a lot of things which AFFS could be supporting:
>  - community events like LUG Radio
>  - cataloguing/coordination activities like British languages l10n
>  - local groups and branches
> but all need ctte to be more open and vocal than it has been.

Maybe. Certainly, being more open (not sure about vocal) would help. I'm
not sure it's the only thing needed for AFFS to support those things,
though. For example, languages l10n is an activity much better done by
developers who have a handle on the problem. Without their expertise, I
don't really know where AFFS can add value. Are there people out there
running into problems trying to do l10n projects? It would be nice to
research and be pro-active about it, but I wouldn't want to be
prescriptive about what needs to happen in that area, we don't know
enough about it.

Similar problems with local groups and branches - actually, I would go
as far to say that we *shouldn't* be doing that, and it should be left
up to the LUGs. Should we communicate with LUGs more? Definitely. But, I
think that's a separate issue - again, it's a question of where/how AFFS
can add value.



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]