----- Original Message ---- > From: Ralph Goers <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com> > To: general@incubator.apache.org > Sent: Sun, June 5, 2011 12:46:31 PM > Subject: Re: OpenOffice: were are we now? > > > On Jun 5, 2011, at 8:59 AM, Joe Schaefer wrote: > >>> > >> > >> I posted a similar statement yesterday. Personally, I think the traffic > >> on this list has settled down a lot in the last 24 hours and is now > >> focusing in on topics more relevant to this list. But maybe that is just > >> because it was Saturday :-) > > > > Most of the sniping^H^H^H^Hdiscussion has moved over to the libreoffice > > lists at this point. > > > >> What I am still waiting to hear on are: > >> 1. The amount of code in the project that the grant didn't give to us > >> under the Apache License. > > > > Not a blocker for starting incubation. IOW we don't ask for this level of > > detail from other podlings. > > It might be a blocker for my vote. You are, of course, free to vote >differently. > This is a much larger project than usually enters the incubator.
I'm thinking this project is on the order of scale that Harmony was. If I'm off by a factor of at least 10 that might be worthwhile to know. > I'm worried that if the project has too much of this kind of work to > deal with it will kill the community. > > > > >> 2. The amount of work that will be required to rework dependencies. > > > > Not a blocker for starting incubation. Keep in mind that the podling may > > elect to "release" via the libreoffice infrastructure, which gives them > > the same flexibility wrt licensing issues that we gave to subversion > > (which to this point has yet to cut a formal ASF release). > > Same as my point above. But your point is well taken that there may > be other ways to achieve the end goal. If leveraging LibreOffice was > going to be the way of doing releases initially then I might expect to > see the proposal updated to indicate that there is agreement with that > community to do that. In the end, to me this is just making sure the > community doesn't have so many roadblocks that failure is very likely. My attitude is that OOo is coming to the ASF. Right now we have a grant, the trademark paperwork will be sorted out, and a developer community is "forming". Until we have a podling in place, nothing else in the ASF is really equipped to make timely decisions about OOo. There are lots of unknowns for the ASF in dealing with OOo, but again we don't have any mechanism for dealing with them until there's a podling to coordinate from. If in 6 months time the podling decides to disband, or the IPMC disbands it by force, so be it. Personally I have no idea how my daily workload will be affected by dealing with OOo's infra requirements. If it just means dishing out dedicated resources and setting up end-user services, that shouldn't present any issues. OTOH staffing a forum with support service isn't something I'm equipped to deal with. Either way, I don't intend to block incubation over it- collectively infra will learn to "cope" with the change. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
