faq
flatforty
contribute
subscribe
configure
search
rdf
main
parent
thread
|
Re: There's a sort of bias
by Phase II on Friday 13/Apr/2007, @02:42
|
"Please don't assume bad things of others, when you didn't check the most basic things."
First, I don't assume bad things of others, namely Google. As it should be clear, it is their competition and they are free whom to chose and whom not. They don't need to justify their choices. It's rather the general penalization of a certain bunch of projects because of their strong ties to a certain toolkit/framework, while without this these projects, and this is the point, would be allowed to apply independently, and probably would have a high stand at the selection process doing so.
"It was KDE's decision to not have duplicated efforts in applying as many entities. As such Koffice, Amarok, etc. specifically themselves decided to NOT make their separate offers. Nothing about being "not allowed to"."
Secondly, please recheck _your_ facts. Amarok was not chosen and KOffice wanted to participate since at least last SoC, but didn't try because the message from Google was to not consider KOffice as independent organization. Also I'm not sure that there is a really broad consensus among all KDE developers or if there a some high-profile applications which would like to try their luck on their own.
And whether KDE and its projects benefit more or less from being seen as a single entity, regardless of whether they could apply independently, is highly debatable and not easy to answer -- to cut this discussion short.
"And obviously Windows is VERY unfairly neglected by Google by your reasoning, it must have at least twice as much users as KDE ;-) and yet barely a project, so what's wrong? Could it be that Gnome can be enhanced in more areas, being technically a few years behind?"
Please quote properly. This assumption was done by the original thread starter, not by me. |
|
|