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

Re: More on the future LDAP admin gui in Debian Edu



On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 03:10:57PM +0200, Klaus Knopper wrote:
Hi Jonas,

On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 02:53:34PM +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 02:26:31PM +0200, Klaus Knopper wrote:
>I already think beyond the projects official end (I see no way to >get anything into Skolelinux earlier),

Why not?

Are you too busy while project leader and do not consider the integration task of priority now? Or do you not expect help from Skolelinux, Debian or CipUX now, e.g. due to the freeze of Squeeze? Or something else?

It's a simple calculation of workload and manpower vs. time and deadlines.

Priority 1 is indeed, as mentioned before, that schools in RLP get their installations ready in time. This includes bugfixes and finding workarounds for difficult scenarios and regulations that I can explain in a different thread if someone is interested.

Having our new stuff in Skolelinux is also a priority, but not top 1. We need to make sure someone else can take over development later, when our funding ends, and this goal would be reached easier if our addons are already official part of Debian and Skolelinux.

I asked for help from Skolelinux but we can't just sit there and wait for it to happen. I understand that Skolelinux suffers from the same problem as most projects that grow quick but have a too small developer and maintainer base. The technical remarks that came on this list were very helpful for me, yet they don't solve the problem of insufficient resources.

Hope this answers your question, though it is not a simple "Yes" or "No".

My question was not binary, and I am happy for your elaborated response!

(and for your others responses too - thanks!)


 - Jonas

--
 * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt
 * Tlf.: +45 40843136  Website: http://dr.jones.dk/

 [x] quote me freely  [ ] ask before reusing  [ ] keep private

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Reply to: