-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Erik Moeller wrote:
On 1/19/08, Gregory Maxwell gmaxwell@gmail.com wrote:
My understanding is that Michael Dale was told that Wikimedia would be using Kaltura and that it might consider metavid some day 'in the future'.
We've made no firm commitment to using Kaltura anywhere. This is the problem with speculation about leaked presentations: They lack context & positioning.
What the hell ever happened to increased transparency? Maybe we wouldn't have to rely on "leaked presentations" if you guys actually, you know, tell us what you're doing. But don't expect us to be silent until after something disagreeable to the Foundation's goals is pushed through if we know about it before then.
In the last few discussions we've had about this issue, you've consistently taken the side of what I deem isolationism: against Creative Commons, against parallel distribution, and now against working with a company that wants to embrace open source & open standards as best they can.
Two points: isolationism is a red herring, a canard. Nobody wants to be isolationist. Attempting to dismiss Greg's views as isolationist when they are in fact rooted in deep concerns over the WMF's mission is fallacious argumentation.
And by the way, when "embracing open source & open standards as best they can" isn't good enough to meet *our* standards, then we shouldn't deal with them. Kaltura has done nothing to embrace our standards but to release a trivial MediaWiki plugin under an open source license. In response, they get to claim "partnership" with us, which makes them much more attractive to VC money. This is not a good deal for the WMF.