About widi.berlios.de -> the authors respond

Greg Tourte gt007a3776 at blueyonder.co.uk
Sun Jul 15 21:57:55 UTC 2001

Hello there,

I have been following this discusion in which I was very interested as it
is a good thing to have more and more projects carried around the Free
Software / Open Source movements (put in the order you see fit!)

However this is starting to be silly: Here you have someone (Gregorio
Robles) who is introducing a project to you, which is very nice of him,
and who replies nicely to all your attacks.

I think it might be time for you to realise that there are other ideas
around and that people can disagree with you while doing very good things.
There is no point in flaming these people just because they don't follow
exactly your stream of ideas. I think that if the FSFE treats all new
projects based on free software/ open source that way, people will tend to
go elsewhere.

People are trying to build something here which can be of interest to
us. Let them do it and comment on it constructively once the results are

Please let them work, follow their project and give constructive comments.


On 15 Jul 2001, MJ Ray wrote:

> Gregorio Robles <grex at scouts-es.org> writes:
> > 	Widi != BerliOS
> > 	We just use the BerliOS services.
> That is possibly a mistake that will colour your returns.
> > 	yes, I wonder, because there are more than 5200 developers that have
> > "trustes" in Widi ;-).
> That is a small fraction.  Do your answers look like they are skewed
> yet?
> > 	You can see it in our questionary... we always talk about "Open Source
> > / Free Software!"
> Is this flame-bait?  Still "Open Source" first, after the historical
> order is recalled to you?
> > 	There is even a question at the end "Open Source or Free Software?"
> > where you can select "no entry", "Free Software" or "Open Source".
> And surely you are more likely to get OS than FS by aligning yourself
> with berlios?  For example, I, personally, am not inclined to complete
> your survey having heard about berlios's associations with
> questionable views.  Presumably even use of their services entitles
> them to some rights over the data submitted?
> > 	Our study provides scientific data. The interpretation of this data is
> > a point that should be made by others (f.ex. FSFE :-)...).
> Please make this data available, or at least inform us of how, when
> and where it will become so.  For one, as a qualified statistician, I
> shall be quite interested to run the rule over the returns, as well as
> how they are (ab)used in debates to come.
> _______________________________________________
> Discussion mailing list
> Discussion at fsfeurope.org
> http://mailman.fsfeurope.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discussion

More information about the Discussion mailing list