On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 4:56 PM, Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton(a)gmail.com>wrote;wrote:
2009/8/28 Anthony <wikimail(a)inbox.org>rg>:
Depends how you want to look at it, since the
dollar bills aren't color
coded or anything. But the last budget I bothered to look at (which I
believe is the one before the last one released) was underspent in the
area
of technology and overspent in other areas. So I
think it's valid to say
that "tech money was spent on other things". As I said, I didn't even
bother looking at the last budget. After hearing Sue admit that the one
I'm
talking about was padded, there was little point.
There were explanations for all those over- and under-spends. I
considered them all to be good explanations. I would have to look at
the report again to be sure, but I think there was a better than
budgeted surplus in the year you are talking about, so the reason for
not spending the full tech budget wasn't lack of funds from having
spent them elsewhere.
Regardless, I wish they had spent the full tech budget, hired an experienced
CTO, and fixed the dumps. Plus a bunch of other things (I don't think
single-user-login had yet been implemented, and I'm pretty sure most of the
more advanced features which supposedly depended on single-user-login like
cross-project watchlists still haven't been implemented).
As you said, whether or not that would have happened given a different board
structure, who knows. But I think there's a chance it would have been
better.