Claudio, One reason I have tried to stay more or less muted (besides being fiendishly busy) is because this Apache effort is a true community effort. Apache is doing brilliantly ensuring that processes are kept open and within the bounds of its charter and that we all are informed of the why, where, what of things.
That is good. But it also means that if we want something we have to do it, and do it within the boundaries we consensually agree with. These are not the OOo ones, though there is obviously correspondence. But it does mean that we who remain interested in a future for the gosh darn best ODF implementation and hope for a one-day-less-bloated version that could fit smug in a tablet have work to do and that means being our own leaders. Put another way: we need to find the resources to get what we want. :-) Cheers, Louis On 12 December 2011 09:05, Claudio F Filho <filh...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi > > On 10-12-2011 20:12, Louis R Suárez-Potts wrote: >> Regular readers of this list might recall discussions by Khirano, Rob >> and others about the fate of the Native Language projects in OOo. I'm >> not sure what the outcome was, and a quick browse of archives didn't >> really enlighten me, as it seems things were left hanging. > > +1. > >> I'd like to see if we can resolve this issue. A recap: OOo had many >> "native-language projects" in which non-coding discussions were in >> the native tongue, e.g., Russian, Viet, Brazilian Portuguese, >> Gaelic(s), and so on. At any given moment there were about a hundred, >> and one can see these listed still at http://projects.openoffice.org >> /native-lang.html. > > It is true. The focus *only*(?) over code, IMHO, is a error. We have > many good people that haven't idea about programming, but have good > ideas about promotion, artwork, and other fronts. > >> Now to the present issue. I've written that I would rather focus >> here, in Apache land, on coding. But that only opens the door, as it >> were, to establishing the very successful Native Language modules >> either in another wing of Apache (??) or outside the Apache frame but >> corresponding to it, so that QA, a key element of the NL projects, >> for instance, could be tied in. Licenses, etc., would have to be >> harmonised. And I'd also suggest using a simpler work medium, such as >> wikis. > > I agree with you, Louis. QA, doc and other elements where is not > necessary coding skill, giving more freedom for non-tecnical people help > the project. > >> PS The majority of the NL projects reformed to constitute >> LibreOffice. Because of disparities of license, I suppose >> harmonisation of effort will be more difficult, but by no means ought >> it to be abandoned, if actual contributors deem it worthwhile. I >> dislike duplication of effort both as a project manager and as >> someone who then has to persuade the bewildered user that A and B are >> just alike but one is more equal than the other. > > I think that more that the license issue, we have a lot of people > unhappy with the way that LibO is following, the same people that was > part of NL and chose in go to LibO believing in a thing and finding > other, so, i think that really have people interested in help here, but > with this posture of Apache are lost, without idea where help. Maybe is > time to consider better this position and find a place for this work's > force. > > Bests, > Claudio
