Hi Sophie, all,
On 2006-11-24, at 04:09 , Sophie Gautier wrote:
Hi Louis, all,
Louis Suarez-Potts wrote:
Hi Sophie, all,
On 2006-11-23, at 24:43 , Sophie Gautier wrote:
Hi Louis,
Louis Suarez-Potts wrote:
On 2006-11-22, at 14:40 , Sherman Boyd wrote:
On 11/22/06, Sherman Boyd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Who is in charge now?
To clarify, who makes the decisions now?
I do, sort of. But in fact, for the Consultants list: no one,
really. Adam adds companies to the list but we have no criteria.
I have proposed some.
But this is only for the English list, I have criteria for the
French list, they are not added by chance. And they are not
present on this list because it's an English speaking list.
Should speaking English be also a criteria to be added to the list ?
There are, I believe, companies that offer services and whatnot in
languages other than English on this list. There is no reason
that this list could not accommodate any language or region; that
was its intent, actually, at first. (Andre Schnabel and others
came up with the idea for it at the same time as I did and it was
not meant to be an English-language list.)
And I agreed with this idea at that time, but now I'm not sure
about having only one page, this make it very difficult to maintain
(I have never been able to work on it however I promised it :(
More, may be it's a French reaction only, but really seeing a page
that begins in English or contains English links make them turn away.
Ah!.... *now* I see.
What would you propose? I would suggest, if feasible, a page that
can change the headings into the appropriate user's language. It's
the usual story. French speaking person comes in and sees headings in
French. And so on. Even the page heading could change.
My interest is in having one spot, one policy, and minimizing extra
work.
I'd also be happy to learn from your FR list criteria.
I check every demand, go on the site they propose, ask for the
training catalog, ask for feed back. Last month I've done a mailing
to all these listed companies asking for feedback on a migration
topic, in the same time I've check that all were still proposing
OOo services and correctly mentioned.
I speak about the list that is here, not the companies that are
listed on the general page :
http://fr.openoffice.org/Marketing/entreprises.html
I think that we would use such a system to check, but might also ask
that people on this list help. For instance, I used to check each and
every request for using the OOo logo as you do above. But after about
4 years of this it became too much. Similarly, when I managed the
CDROM page, I'd check them all out. But again, too much, especially
as sites can change (one famous one: went from distributing free
software to free pornography). Right now there is a more or less
imperfect but usable mechanism of self-policing (as it were) on the
CDROM list. At some point one does have to trust.
But when we are also listing for free those who are doing good works
for OOo, then we have to evaluate their good works and not take their
word for it.
I don't really care about the structure, whether it is benevelent
dictator or a board that votes when the community consensus isn't
clear. I do care about accountability, which doesn't seem to be a
feature of our current system.
Quite; I do not disagree with you.
I completly disagree, sorry.
With? But I asked in another message.
Sophie, I get the feeling you are disagreeing with something that
I am not saying. Would you be so kind as to elaborate?
Sorry for being not clear. I was disagreeing with the fact that
"accountability which is not a feature of our current system."
Ah. I think the point he was making was that this list on Bizdev is
essentially opaque, at least in terms of how a listing was put there.
And if we charge, we obviously need to be accountable. I was agreeing
that we need to be accountable.
The list in the FR project is considered as a service for our
users, it is used and visited and these companies also give us
feedback on the work they do. Of course, we don't evaluate the
services that are provided.
Right.
For example for this project we have :
http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/MutuOOo
This page collects a list of applications dedicated to Townhall
services, the idea behind it is to make them run with OOo. Here the
feedback from companies working on OOo migration is of great help
to collect the datas.
This is this part of collaboration between this listed companies
and our project that I would like to be considered.
Again I'm not against a fee, but my concern is more about equity
between those who are participating and those who don't care.
I quite agree: there has to be equity that is just. That is why we do
need for those whom we would list for free to evaluate that what they
are doing really justifies our gift.
Hope my position is more clear now
Kind regards
Sophie
Best,
louis
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
