On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 4:09 PM, Andrea Pescetti <pesce...@apache.org> wrote: > On 11/01/2013 Rob Weir wrote: >> >> In any case, pointing out the lie on this list already gives 90% of >> the benefit, since such FUD cannot survive the light of day. A blog >> post is unnecessary. > > > Regardless of what prompted the discussion here, a specific blog post about > what the Symphony contribution specifically has meant for OpenOffice would > probably be very informative for our users. > > It would also be a nice way to show that formerly proprietary code was > incorporated in OpenOffice and is now available to other products that can > integrate it (and actually, in a few cases, probably already did). > > Of course, no need to post it today, and especially no need to post it with > the aim of refuting misleading claims... I'm just saying that the discussion > here suggested that the Symphony contribution in itself is worth to be > properly acknowledged and get exposure. >
Agreed. So I am glad then that you made the call for additional blog authors. It is probably best if the Symphony contribution is acknowledged, etc., by a non-IBM project member. That would make it harder to dismiss it in some quarters. -Rob > Regards, > Andrea.
