Re: Gosa vs. CipUX
Hi Klaus,
On Thu, Jan 06, 2011 at 09:44:35PM +0100, Klaus Knopper wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Thu, Jan 06, 2011 at 03:48:12PM +0100, Andreas B. Mundt wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Thu, Jan 06, 2011 at 01:01:57PM +0100, Mike Gabriel wrote:
[...]
> > Candidates were LWAT used in lenny, unmaintained and with dead
> > upstream, GOsa, with upstream activities and support, but not
> > especially targeted for schools, and finally CipUX. As the CipUX
> > people seem to see no chance to integrate their work for reasons they
> > can tell you better, nobody active in the international project worked
> > on the integration of CipUX. (This is a rather critical point, and it
> > seems there are a lot personal feelings and the like involved ...).
>
> Sorry for potentially making this discussion longer than it should be...
> Would you please explain to me, again, what "the CipUX people" have to
> do, or failed to do, in order to get their working packages integrated
> into Skolelinux? I think "the CipUX poeple" really _want_ to have their
> stuff integrated into Skolelinux, but apparently don't know how the
> magic is going to happen.
>
I don't know, and I don't want to accuse anybody at all. I even don't
know if anybody failed to do anything. There was this lengthy thread
last year <URL:http://lists.debian.org/debian-edu/2010/10/msg00106.html>,
where you explained your point of view a bit, and for some of your
points I can really imagine what happend, and your points are
absolutely valid. For sure there is an other point of view, and as
usual reality is probably somewhere in between. We are all humans, we
all have our vanities and egos and there's no big boss here to decide
how it's done and everybody follows. We all want to be (little) big
bosses. Some of the problems might be that we have no structure to
make controversial decisions in a transparent way and there are a lot
of unspoken arguments, feelings and the like around ...
[...]
>
> Maybe it's just me, but I fail to see a technical problem on the side of
> "the CipUX people". This has already been discussed, but with no
> apparent result that explains to me why CipUX is out of question (or I
> just missed it?).
>
Don't know. Perhaps just try implementing it in SVN until someone
cries out and stops you (or doesn't). That's kind of how I did it with
GOsa, but you might realize, I'm also not very happy with the situation.
> >
> > 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?
>
Again I don't know. I am just a little contributer and I will neither
have time nor energy to drive things in the near future. I would
prefer a more flexible system in general [1], as I think that's what
schools need and I think this can be realized with GOsa. If others,
that have much more experience and time to spend on the project, don't
support this approach, I have to live with that.
So along these lines I suggest to try to be as flexible as possible
with regard to the necessary ldap structure. Or if that's not
possible, don't make a bad compromize which doesn't fit in the end but
invent a sensible structure yourself.
Regards,
Andi
BTW, the expression "the CipUX people" is in no way meant to
be condescending or insulting. Absolutely not.
[1] <URL:http://lists.debian.org/debian-edu/2010/08/msg00037.html>
Reply to: