On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 10:02 PM, Louis Suárez-Potts <lsuarezpo...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > > On 4 May 2012 09:52, Yong Lin Ma <mayo...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 9:17 PM, Louis Suárez-Potts <lui...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> Hi all >>> I raised earlier off list the idea of (re-)forming a language group focused >>> on ZH localization and operating to support Chinese speakers and those >>> based in Beijing (or wherever it makes sense). We did this in OOo, and it >>> worked …not as well as any of us would have liked. But that was because a >>> single company dominated--a less than desirable situation. >>> >> >> Yes, other than covered by different license, not dominated by a >> single company is the major difference between AOO and OO.o. >> >> >>> The idea, this time around, would be to have members of CS2C, IBM and other >>> organizations (and I can think of a few) to have a place to coordinate, >>> learn, communicate in Chinese while also working with the Apache OO lists >>> in English. Localization would be essential. (ZH in China differs from that >>> used in TW; that can be accommodated: this is a linguistic effort, mostly.) >> >> It would be not necessary, if this is just for IBM and CS2C teams in >> Beijing. Cause it would be more effective for the two teams to have >> conference calls or meet in person. > > <snip> > > I don't exactly disagree with you but I was unclear. I did not mean to > usurp the Apache Way or the merits of being a commiter nor the path by > which one becomes one. Rather, I wanted to avoid the problem facing > the establishment of regional and linguistic groups. That problem is > having one or even two companies dominate the effort. Sometimes that's > unavoidable. But if it can be the case that other companies and > organizations can be involved, then great. And if such involvement is > made more likely by having publicly accessible informational projects, > which are open to all comers and which *do not* usurp the Apache Way > but rather supplement it, then, as far as I can tell, that's good. > (Indeed, having conference calls between one company and another seems > to reinscribe the problem of having one company dominate, and it > further turns a linguistic effort into a very localized one that's > also exclusive.) >
Louis, Thank you for the clarification. When I say conference call here, I mean call between contributors instead of companies. And it is only for speeding up communication and not for making important decisions in private. And I don't worry about an Apache project may get dominated by single company, due to the diversity requirement on PPMC members. I am new to ASF. Maybe someone know examples that Apache project got dominated and failed. > Again: Not to usurp, diminish, alter the way in which one becomes a > committer but to open the doors even wider and to engage regionally > and linguistically all those who might wish to join. > > Ciao > Louis
