On Sun, Nov 13, 2011 at 06:47:36PM +0400, Ilya Chernykh wrote:
>On Sunday 13 November 2011 15:46:09 Julius Schwartzenberg wrote:
>
>> From now on it should hopefully be clear that Trinity really appreciates
>> cooperation with any KDE3 version, 

Great!

>> but that promotion of non-Trinity
>> releases is considered inappropriate on the Trinity mailing lists.

I don't see why, if it's done non-competitively.  Tim has said 
explicitly that it's ok for Ilya to post here.  And the details 
of cooperation between the two projects -- sharing of patches, 
etc. -- and even discussion of differences in the design philo-
sophy of the two projects, are directly relevant to this list.

>This does not mean they should mock in shit any other project.

Absolutely!  And vice-versa of course.  

It is vital that we stop feeling resentment about mistreatment 
in the past.  The past can never be changed, so if we keep 
reacting to it in the _same_ way we will always be unhappy.

But we _can_ change _now_ our reactions to events in the past, 
and thus become happy again.

We must use the rational side of our mind to guide the emotional 
side!

We all must keep in mind that the furtherance of KDE3 is 
essential to the continuing usage of Linux, which is of 
major importance to human survival.  This fact must motivate 
us to make ourselves stop having negative emotional reactions 
to past insults.  The success of KDE3/Trinity is _infinitely_ 
more important than our previous hurt feelings!

When talking about the other project and its people, it's good
to put ourselves into an understanding that, "We're on the same
side, we're all good people, working together with similar goals, 
and I'm offering a helpful suggestion in a kind and friendly way."

And then review what you write before sending it to make sure
that it will be received as kind, friendly, and helpful in
the _recipient's_ context (view of things).

Communications are always interpreted in the context of the 
recipient, so the sender must formulate the message so that 
it will have the desired meaning _after_ that interpretation.
It helps for the sender to imagine being the recipient and 
reading the message.  

We should be happy that both projects exist.  The fact that 
there are two (or more) ongoing forks of KDE3 makes it clear 
to the public that KDE4 is seriously flawed, and that KDE3 
forks are therefore justified in existing.  

Strength in numbers!

  Mark