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

Re: Gosa vs. CipUX



Hi,

On Do 06 Jan 2011 21:44:35 CET Klaus Knopper wrote:

So I started to give GOsa a try. One of the main reasons for me was
the use of available software and the idea that a project with limited
manpower should focus its coding activities on stuff that's special to
the goals (school specific stuff) and not already solved elsewhere
(general system- and user-administration). Further more, I hoped to use
features like FAI which allows more flexibility for schools which want
to customize their setup individually at a later stage.

In the meantime, I changed my view a bit. It looks like GOsa is only
seen as a temporary solution by a majority of the project. (Of course,
taking this attitude leads to a limping integration, nobody is interested in
polishing and improving the setup, it's perhaps even kind of spoiled by
demanding 'compatibility with other solutions', which in turn leads to
the fact that everybody handles it like something you don't like but
can't get rid of (yet)).

So if you ask me, I think as long as I am the only one supporting
GOsa, it will go away as soon as there is a working alternative
available.

Thanks for sharing your thoughts about this. So, it is probably not a
good idea for us to either put any effort into GOsa integration of our
tools, since it is "temporary", right?

To me this feels like I digged out quite an issue here... It may be good to come together on e.g. IRC and discuss a common strategy on this, doesn't it?

It surely does not feel like making any sense if people code into different directions without focusing on a common intention.

Greets,
Mike




--

DAS-NETZWERKTEAM
mike gabriel, dorfstr. 27, 24245 barmissen
fon: +49 (4302) 281418, fax: +49 (4302) 281419

GnuPG Key ID 0x1943CA5B
mail: m.gabriel@das-netzwerkteam.de, http://das-netzwerkteam.de

freeBusy:
https://mail.das-netzwerkteam.de/freebusy/m.gabriel%40das-netzwerkteam.de.xfb

Attachment: pgpR3CGHNiMpm.pgp
Description: Digitale PGP-Unterschrift


Reply to: