[Koha] Koha demo links on koha.org

[Ben Ide]

Replies inline..

On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 11:11 AM, Chris Nighswonger
<cnighswonger at foundations.edu> wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 10:49 AM, Nicole Engard <nengard at gmail.com> wrote:
>> I think we've gotten off track here a bit.
>
> Maybe not too far off. :-) The entire issue with the links devolves to
> the continued silence by LL to any requests; even those by all
> standards reasonable.

So, if LibLime promised to make all their code available after
customer signoff, would this reduce all of this discussion to a
footnote in Koha's history?  Because this promise has been made on
more than one occasion.

>> On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 10:37 AM, Ben Ide <benide at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 9:48 AM, Chris Nighswonger
>>> <cnighswonger at foundations.edu> wrote:
>>> From Ben, with snips:
>>>>>> You'll quote someone who spoke with Josh in a telephone conversation,
>>>>>> but not Josh's direct response to the list?
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Josh is a subscriber to this list and thus is free to correct any
>>>> mis-quotes of himself. I would encourage him to do so. I do not think
>>>> for a moment that anyone on this list desires to mis-quote Josh. On
>>>> the contrary, I think we would all desire most sincerely to very
>>>> clearly understand Josh and his present course of action.
>>>
>>> To what advantage?  Why should he send another missive here when all
>>> have been content to ignore the previous ones?
>>>
>>> http://www.nabble.com/user/UserPosts.jtp?user=97160
>>>
>
> By the looks of the length of the thread referenced I would say that
> Josh's previous "missive" was not ignored by any stretch of the
> imagination. Rather it looks like Josh failed to follow up with
> clarification to his "missive." This is the very issue of "continued
> silence" which we now experience with requests which, again, are
> reasonable by any standard.

Actually, with perhaps two exceptions, all the discussion off that
thread can be summed up with "Thanks. Could you use Git, please?"

>>>> Perhaps you could request this of Josh or encourage the individual at
>>>> your organization who is responsible for your relationship to LL to
>>>> request it of Josh?
>>>
>>> Again, what on earth would be the advantage of that?  To me, it just
>>> seems like a waste of a busy person's time.
>
> I would expect that it would be obvious that the customers of LL are
> in the absolute best position to bring legitimate pressure to bear on
> LL to reengage with the community. The investment of "a busy person's
> time" to achieve the re-engagement of LL in the community would be
> anything but a "waste." To the contrary, it would probably rank among
> the greater contributions to the Koha project. (No one denies the
> large contribution LL has made to Koha nor despises it. The complaint
> is with how they have handled themselves in the light of other
> business pressures.)

Let me ask a very basic question, which I think is at the heart of
this matter.  How is LibLime's actions different from those of
software.coop, the work done for the Learning Access Institute, and
HTL?  All have code that, so far as I can tell, have not been released
back to TKC,* despite open source licensing agreements.  What makes
this stink bigger?

*If I'm wrong, please correct me.  Lard knows I frequently am.  :-)

> It is my humble opinion that your organization could very possibly be
> in the best position to make such a valuable contribution to this
> community.

Thank you.  But as it's been said before, corporations have the right
to profit and programmers have the right to get paid.

I have another question that maybe someone can help me with.  I've
been reading a bit about git and it seems like a real pain to use
while you're developing code.  Afterwards, when you're writing it, it
seems like a decent tool for dissemination, but before you're done it
seems really cumbersome.  Is there something I'm missing?
http://git.or.cz/course/svn.html#share

Thanks,
-- Ben