[odf-discuss] GNOME Foundation Statement on ECMA
daniel.carrera at zmsl.com
Mon Nov 26 10:51:18 EST 2007
I'd like to ask everyone to cool down the tone a little and not get
personal. This thread is too close to a flame war. I don't want flames
on this list.
Jeff Waugh wrote:
> <quote who="Ian Lynch">
>> Precisely. Learn the politics. In the end it's just as important as the
> I *KNOW* the politics, Ian. I have spent years committed to Software Freedom
> and GNOME. Please do not assume that I am somehow naive about the issues
> here. However, as explained in my email above (right where you snipped), the
> politics are simply not relevant to the ISO process. In fact, they harm our
>>> You're likely to disagree with that. That's okay. But when we start
>>> pitching, say, an unencumbered, Open and Free video codec to ISO (which
>>> would be a massive win for Freedom), be aware that the "only one
>>> standard" argument would *massively* hurt us in that mission. An ISO
>>> standard for video already exists, and it's horrifyingly encumbered.
>> Different arena. Win one battle at a time.
> Successful battles are built on those fought before. Read what I wrote
> again. By pursuing the "one standard" argument, we are setting a very bad
> precedent for future battles. I'm not willing to exchange short term wins
> for long term failures.
>> If you think we can avoid engaging M$ politically I think you are very
>> much mistaken.
> I don't think we can avoid engaging Microsoft (please don't write "M$", it
> is immature and pointless) politically. What I explained in my email is that
> politics has no bearing on the ISO standardisation process.
> - Jeff
More information about the odf-discuss