Re: Some impressions and comments aboutOGo

On 10.12.2007, at 00:35, Sebastian Reitenbach wrote:
> nope, but I totally share Adams opionion about Open Source, when it  
> does not fit to your needs feel free to fit/extend it.


Well, I do not ;-) If we, as a FOSS project, produce a product called  
"OGo", it should have decent quality and it should be sufficiently  
well documented (Adam's docs are excellent, but they should be  
integrated much better into a new website).

IMHO OGo should produce something which can be used by non-hackers.  
Pointing users to the fact that this is FOSS and if they care they can  
improve it leads to nowhere :-)

Which BTW brings me back to crappy packages. I have the impression  
that we should stop providing packages from the OGo website. That  
definitely hurts, but unmaintained/crappy packages are useless too.
Maybe we should instead focus on providing a great build-from-the- 
source experience.

Greets,
   Helge

PS: people can already buy the Instant-OGo to avoid the install  
troubles (and get all the other stuff like mail servers too). Thats  
what I would do if I would need to install Asterisk ...
-- 
Helge Hess
http://www.helgehess.eu/
-- 
OpenGroupware.org Discussion [email protected]
http://mail.opengroupware.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss