Niels Reedijk wrote:
Hi, On 15 April 2010 16:56, Jorge G. Mare <koki@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:Anyway, it would be nice for the project to take a clear stance on whether it wants to embrace S&T or not. The folks from University of //Auckland deserve to know IMO (even if it means not embracing their code for whatever reason).Indeed this issue was settled then, however, since October 2009 nothing has happened at all, they did not assert their SVN access and as such this patch is currently dead. It's not as if SVN access is going to revive the activity. So I'm with Axel here: first let the those that were so inclined to work on it show that they are still alive and kicking (in the form of a patch or patches) and then we can revive the branch with access.
I am not sure what "issue" you are referring to and how or where it was settled, but the vote was never wrapped up, and if there was any indication of where the tally was going, it was in favor of granting access to the S&T devs and not the other way around as you suggest or would like. Instead of starting a controversy like you did at the end of the thread (which is what probably what killed the vote), cast your +1 or -1 vote and live with it.
Otherwise, if you are going to start a vote and then totally ignore it, why start it in the first place?
Regards, -- Jorge/aka Koki Website: http://haikuzone.net RSS: http://haikuzone.net/rss.xml