Hi, On 2012-03-19, at 08:41 , Rob Weir wrote: > Any ideas and the best ways how we can improve in this area after AOO > 3.4 releases?
Lots, and these would complement the rather good ideas already proposed. What we did at OOo actually worked--to attract developers and contributors of all sorts. What worked against us I do not think I need spell out, but the cussedness of the code was not really the determining factor. What really would help, besides giving would-bes a clean entry, is to have mentors, more or less do-able tasks that are identified as such. (We tried getting to this many times, and I strongly urged my erstwhile colleagues in this area for, uhm, years. Finally happened, and we got our to-dos but still not clearly identified according to level of difficulty. I can conceive of several here whose work would assist in the identification of tasks newbies could approach--and even post-newbies-and perhaps even in mentoring.) Also, what helps tremendously is what we are doing already: presenting a community that is open, friendly, and generally has a good attitude about what it is doing and where it is going. There are millions using OOo as their primary ODF implementation, and those mostly include those who have come to it via the national or sub-national government agency. I think it's about time that they are looking to AOO for the next step. And I can think of at least two, and probably more, national bodies so interested. Do these give us developers straight away? I don't know. The problem with OOo was, as [not] said ultimately political, not codical (comical?). Engaging these longtime users, as well as new ones, with the possibilities represented by this community, which is open and unencumbered--ought to be easier. My own approach is to focus on ODF and on the benefits offered not only by the AOO implementation but by its community. -louis
