Since resolving Priority #1, we have not returned to Andrea's list of 
priorities.

The #2 from the list seems critical to everything else.

   2) Internal reorganization: people say what they are going to 
      do to drive the project forward (so an "active" approach 
      rather than the "I don't have time, but someone should..." 
      approach which is not working).

I started looking at this for myself and have to face what my capacities are 
and where I can commit myself.  I am still looking at what I have to say for 
myself. I know that I have far more interests than capacity and I must see what 
I can do to provide a realistic statement.

It is different to separate out areas of concern.  We all have many concerns 
and desires concerning Apache OpenOffice.  Rather, we want to look at where 
each of us, can act directly and influence the course of the project by direct 
contributions that are in our power to make.

 - Dennis

LONGER LITTLE ESSAY

I think each of us, particularly but not only the Apache OpenOffice committers, 
need to look at where we are already equipped (have the capability at hand) to 
take action.  It would be useful to somehow have a roster that allows us all to 
see what that those capabilities are in understanding work in progress and 
helping to be realistic in what our combined efforts can produce.

And each of us can identify how much capacity we have for carrying out work and 
report what that is too.  This is not like promising to do something or create 
schedules.  It is so we are clear what the capacity for the project is as a 
volunteer activity.  And as capacity or interest changes, that can be kept 
visible and the project community can adjust however it is able.

We have skills far beyond those of working on the code (and are probably 
limited in that important area), and all of those capacities are important to 
understand.

I put Capacity/Commitment in the subject and realized that we are not 
collecting commitments (although they are welcome when offered).  I think 
Accountability is the correct term.  I mean that we provide an account for 
ourselves and our what we are working on, and do not go invisible.  It is only 
in providing an account, so others know the state of affairs.  There is no 
judgment being made.  It is all right to change personal plans, have life 
happen, and even choose to do something different, whether for the project or 
not.  It is all right to fail.  Some will simply proceed with time available 
and *any* contribution is valuable.  The account is for mutual visibility and 
some certainty, not for being assessed.

I think knowing what actions folks are considering and where effort is 
available is important to allow us to coordinate among our interests better.

-----Original Message-----
From: Andrea Pescetti [mailto:pesce...@apache.org] 
Sent: Saturday, January 24, 2015 09:56
To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
Subject: Short-term priorities for OpenOffice

[ ... ]

2) Internal reorganization: people say what they are going to do to 
drive the project forward (so an "active" approach rather than the "I 
don't have time, but someone should..." approach which is not working).

3) Re-alignment between PMC and active community (the PMC, not the 
Chair, steers the project; so people who work must be in the PMC and 
people in the PMC should confirm they are still interested in being there).

4) External reorganization: decide how we see OpenOffice as part of a 
larger ecosystem, so what we can do in terms of collaboration with other 
projects that are from Apache or from outside Apache.

5) Release OpenOffice 4.1.2 (all of this must produce something for our 
users!). This has a number of significant subtasks and preliminary tasks 
(Release manager, digital signing...) but it would be pointless to 
address them now.

[ ... ]


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Reply via email to