[Koha] Foundation conversation

Chris Cormack chris at bigballofwax.co.nz
Sat Oct 16 17:43:48 NZDT 2010

I think you are confusing the issues ed. Complaining about bad behaviour is
not the same as caring enough about a domain the project no longers uses, to
allow for a stacked foundation.

As for the fork, you have it wrong too, there are most definitely some
forks, Koha is not one of them.
I don't see why we should have to rename, how about we just keep using
koha-community.org and working on Koha.

Ill make you a deal, i won't mention koha.org again if that will assuage
your worry that I want it back enough to rush in a foundation with special
treatment for one company.


On 16 Oct 2010 17:25, "ed c" <terrapin44 at yahoo.com> wrote:

--- On Fri, 10/15/10, Reed Wade <reedwade at gmail.com> wrote:

> From: Reed Wade <reedwade at gmail.com>

> Subject: Re: [Koha] Foundation conversation
> To: Koha at lists.katipo.co.nz
> Date: Friday, October 15, 2010, 10:21 PM

> 2010/10/16 ed c <terrapin44 at yahoo.com>
> >
> > My proposal is that PTFS and HLT each would get an
If they only "used to care about" it why do people keep complaining about
what Liblime puts there?

> rate any kind of additional voice or
> control?
> I like the "it's people -- not companies" sch...
Obviously I disagree in at least some limited form.

However if people form the anti-PTFS side are unwilling to compromise, I see
only two options: 1) Two Kohas with the same name that will only more
confuse people and make the issues David Lang mentioned much worse and more
wide spread, or 2) The anti-PTFS people finishing the fork of the product
and coming up with a new name for there version.


> -reed
> _______________________________________________
> Koha mailing list http://koha-commu...
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.katipo.co.nz/pipermail/koha/attachments/20101016/22bf3a16/attachment.htm 

More information about the Koha mailing list