| 1 |
Thanks for saying what I wanted to say in human readable English. You |
| 2 |
have exactly pointed out what I wanted to point out in considerably less |
| 3 |
'code'. |
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
On Wed, September 7, 2005 06:39, Finn Thain wrote: |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> On Tue, 6 Sep 2005, Grobian wrote: |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
>> I have the impression that a few major things *have* to be done. This |
| 11 |
>> requires 'action' and taking discisions that probably not everyone is |
| 12 |
>> going to be happy with. |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> Yes. You also made this point earlier in the thread, but it got snipped |
| 15 |
> (I'll repeat it here:) |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
>> > > If Mike Frysinger would jump in today or tomorrow, here in this |
| 18 |
>> > > team, we'd have to listen to "OSX sucks" all day long, but also "if |
| 19 |
>> > > we do it like this, then it works, even on osx". |
| 20 |
> |
| 21 |
> And that is one of the main reasons why, in big business, an executive or |
| 22 |
> team of executives from outside the organisation (often from overseas) |
| 23 |
> might be installed by a board to do a particular job (e.g. a |
| 24 |
> reorganisation). |
| 25 |
> |
| 26 |
> This is not always because the vision or ability is lacking in-house, it |
| 27 |
> is because no-one in-house wants the job (makes to many enemies to say |
| 28 |
> "gentoo-macos sucks"), or because noone in-house will be given sufficient |
| 29 |
> respect ("he is just one of us, and we don't see a problem") or because |
| 30 |
> noone in-house can be trusted to do it (doesn't really apply here, since |
| 31 |
> nepotism and corruption aren't the issue). |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
-- |
| 34 |
gentoo-osx@g.o mailing list |
Archives