On Oct 14, 2011, at 2:32 PM, Simon Phipps wrote: > On Oct 14, 2011 7:28 PM, "Jim Jagielski" <j...@jagunet.com> wrote: > > > > My only wish is that we had someone at the conference who > > was supportive of the ASF and the AOOo podling in this > > matter who was able to explain this in a positive light… > > Well, Doug Heintzman and I are sitting together here and both willing to pass > on Apache's goodwill. All we really need is a statement saying "that PR > wasn't an attack, sorry if it seemed that way". Here's Doug to explain: > > "Hi Jim this is Doug Heintzman here (IBM). We are actually having some very > good constructive conversations here. We did about a 3 hour dialogue with a > very large group on the OpenOffice project and its status, aspirations and > opportunities for cooperation, which the LibreOffice conference graciously > put on their agenda along with presentations from other AOOo participants. > It went very well and was well received. I am hopeful that we're making good > progress towards a construtive detente. > > The question that Simon is asking is simple. Some have read the "best wishes > to TDF and LibreOffice" as being sarcastic and mean spirited. I certainly > didn't read it that way. The issue seems to be that the paragraph expressing > this wish was within the flow of a different story about people not giving > AOOo its due. >
The sentence right before that was intended to be the "shift of flow": "At the ASF, the answer is openness, not further fragmentation. There is ample room for multiple solutions in the marketplace that are Powered by Apache. We welcome differences of opinion: a requirement at Apache is that a healthy project be supported by an open, diverse community comprising multiple organizations and individual contributors." The phrase directed to LO was intended to emphasize our welcoming of differing opinions and our belief in diverse communities of multiple organizations. It was also to show that we *want* LO to succeed, and we are happy that they are, and that they (and others) can continue to succeed without it meaning the "death" of any other org. So the phrase "We congratulate the LibreOffice community on their success over their inaugural year and wish them luck in their future endeavors" was meant with a true and honest heart. I can see that, I will personally apologize if the flow of the PR resulted in what could be taken as a mean spirited slight where we did not intend it. Anyone who knows the ASF knows that we wouldn't be so petty or sarcastic as such a PR. > All that he was asking was for an official clarification that you were being > sincere and not sarcastic because of course sarcasm isn't going to help the > politics. I assume the blog was on the up and up and am representing it as > such. Hope you can clarify..." > > Greetings from Paris from us both :-) As far as the PR being "an attack"… well, it wasn't an attack, but it was a serious and concerned statement that all the FUD needs to stop, by all entities engaged in it; it damages the entire OOo ecosystem and that is something that the ASF cannot, and will not, let slide. I am sure that TDF feels the exact same way.
