Re: Inflection Point - A Strategic Plan for Linux Australia

On 06/01/16 15:43, Lev Lafayette wrote:
> I have to respectfully disagree Michael.
>
> 'Bikeshedding' is a discussion about an mostly irrelevant point because
> everyone can have an opinion on it, whilst not contributing to the
> difficult questions. "What colour should the bike shed be painted?" is the
> traditional example cited, because it really isn't that important compared
> to building the nuclear power plant*.
>
> The issue isn't about Google Docs vs git as such, but rather whether an
> organisation that calls itself "Linux Australia" or "Open Source
> Australia" should use Linux-friendly and open-source tools or something
> else that is convenient and/or popular but doesn't comply to open
> standards, doesn't maximise accessibility, or isn't FOSS. This is *highly*
> relevant.
>

I don't disagree with your points. Linux Australia, wherever possible, 
should use free and open source software and adopt open standards.

However, and this is a very big however, when someone takes the time and 
energy to write a strategic paper with the intent of maturing and 
advancing an organisation, this sort of criticism not only detracts from 
the discussion at hand, it belittles the efforts of the author by 
focussing on the format of content, not the content itself. No wonder we 
have such difficulty attracting and retaining volunteer contributors if 
this is how their contributions are treated.

I'd like to propose the following;

* That Inflection Point will, at an appropriate time, be moved to a GIt 
repository managed by LA
* Until that time discussion regarding its *contents* continue on Google 
Docs

I'd say let's build the nuclear reactor, but given North Korea's 
activities this afternoon it may be considered poor taste.

Regards,
Kathy