On Apr 24, 2012, at 8:35 AM, Rob Weir wrote: > On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 11:26 AM, drew <d...@baseanswers.com> wrote: >> On Tue, 2012-04-24 at 11:10 -0400, Rob Weir wrote: >>> On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 10:50 AM, drew jensen >>> <drewjensen.in...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> On Tue, 2012-04-24 at 10:32 -0400, Rob Weir wrote: >>>>> Wearing my IBM hat for a minute... >>>>> >>>>> We're putting the final touches on our Symphony contribution. The >>>>> contribution will look something like this: >>>>> >>>>> 1) A source tree >>>>> >>>>> 2) An SGA that covers IBM intellectual property in that source tree >>>>> >>>>> 3) A set of binary install images, for the convenience of project >>>>> members wishing to review this contribution >>>>> >>>>> 4) Some written material that describes in detail the enhancements >>>>> made in Symphony compared to OpenOffice. >>>>> >>>>> The source tree is comparable in size to OpenOffice, so it will not be >>>>> possible for us to just check it in without interfering with Apache >>>>> SVN mirroring. So I'm proposing that we (IBM) will make a local SVN >>>>> repository, check the code into there, and then generate a dumpfile >>>>> from SVN that we can share with Infra, and which they can schedule for >>>>> import. >>>>> >>>>> I propose that we put this tree here: >>>>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/ooo/symphony/trunk >>>>> >>>>> Once we've made the contribution, and once the community has had the >>>>> opportunity to review what is there, we can then have a discussion on >>>>> how we can make best use of this contribution to advance the project. >>>>> >>>>> Does this sound right? >>>> >>>> >>>>> Any concerns? >>>> >>>> Yeah, a few - but I'll wait for the release to happen first. >>>> >>> >>> We intend to make the contribution immediately after the 3.4 release. >>> We're doing the work now. That's why I'm bring this up now. >>> >>> If you withhold your concerns until after the 3.4 release then we may >>> be unable to address your feedback until after the contribution is >>> made. >> >> *smile*... well, in that case I have no concerns - I guess it will all >> be quite good, can't wait to see it :) >> > > Note: the thread is about contribution *logistics*, e.g., getting the > bits from here to there is the least disruptive way. If you have any > concerns with my proposal for that, please speak up now. Anyone. But > I do have some experience with this. Rememeber, I'm the one who did > this for the initial check-in of the OOo source tree. > > If you have concerns with the contents of Symphony, the features, what > we do with the code, etc., then that's a discussion for after we get > the files over. Unless of course your concerns are so great you want > to prevent the code from being checked in at all. > > I fully expect we'll have a lively discussion about "What should we do > with the Symphony contribution?" But that discussion will only have > an informed technical basis once we've contributed the code. > > Make sense?
Yes, I like that this will come in as a separate part of the svn repos. Post AOO 3.4 release it is very reasonable to expect a lively discussion about the AOO Roadmap. It is hoped that will reach a consensus. I believe there will be good reasons to balance a cleanup AOO 3.4.1/3.5 release with starting immediately on AOO 4.0 via integration of Symphony features. By cleanup I mean a combination of more languages, critical bug fixes, read me / installation improvements, and NOTICE, LICENSE, and DISCLAIMER organization. NOTICE, LICENSE and DISCLAIMER issues might impact the release. I'm thinking things through look for an email in several hours on the [VOTE][DISCUSS] thread. Regards, Dave > > -Rob > >> //drew >> >>> >>> -Rob >>> >>>> //drew >>>> >>>> >>> >> >>
