2012/5/20 Paolo Pozzan <pa...@z2z.it>
>
>
> Reading to all other messages in this thread, I think many missed the
> point.
> The problem is not about what language to use, but how to manage the
> to-be-volunteers which don't or wouldn't have the same skills as ours.
> Volunteers are a big marketing weapon; is like happy workers that freely
> advertise the company they work for. OTOH rejected volunteers (even for
> difficulty of access - e.g. language) will feel the final product less
> theirs, so they will be less willing to marketing that.
>
> Like many "opposers" of AOO Project (incubating) (get it? ;-) say, the
> Apache Software Foundation has a long history of successful software for
> skilled technical users. I bet that the average OpenOffice user don't even
> know what a programming language exactly is, so I think this is a new
> exciting challenge for the Apache folks.
>
> What I understood in my experience with italian volunteers is that people
> love to contribute in a hassle-free maneer, this means that someone else
> have to show them the way, letting them just do. I know this may sound
> disappointing, but it is not a limit of freedom if someone choose by
> his/her own to follow some rules.
>
> I think that it would be useful to write some basic guidelines for the
> native language teams to know what to do and what not. Letting them know it
> would eventually lead to the birth of local communities, where "basic"
> contributors will eventually will go there.
> Maybe many of us have still in mind the old OpenOffice.org structure,
> which worked fine for the language teams and to which we can consider
> copying from.
>
> Paolo
>

That's exactly what is happening to brazilian community. The most of us
have not technical skills. But we are AOO users and we have influence to
convince many people and organizations to give a chance on AOO. And we are
being striked a lot because of that, but we are standing still.

-- 
Paulo de Souza Lima
http://almalivre.wordpress.com
Curitiba - PR
Linux User #432358
Ubuntu User #28729

Reply via email to