Re: [board-discuss] Re: Libreoffice Vanilla
On Thu, Mar 25, 2021 at 5:42 AM Thorsten Behrens wrote: > > Hi Dennis, > > Dennis Roczek wrote: > > E.g. You know very well how long which MS Windows version is supported with > > which support plan. In the store you can only guess: > > is it > > * a live time license (buy one, only get this major release updates) > > * some X months supported license > > * buy-one-get-forever-updates license > > * something different > > > Fair points. > > Still, before exploring if/how to address one or more of the above > options, what would you (and others here!) consider a fair deal? Depends. Based on Vanilla having a release cycle close to the TDF official releases and Vanilla representing what TDF/Publisher considers general use version. ie Today this would be 7.0.3 per recent TDF announcement. I would like to see a term that ensures no less than two full update cycles and in some circumstances three updates. At no time would the user have a version not receiving active scheduled updates. 18 months I believe fills all three of my requirements. ie. When the user purchases the initial install that is version 0 - today that is LO 6.4.4 and they would receive update 1 (7.0.3) and finish with update 2 (7.1.3) and depending on where the initial purchase was early in the version 0 availability window possibly one more. (Note; IDK is there a general rule as to which minor update 6.4.x constitutes a move from the cutting edge/power user release the for general user status.) Drew > > Cheers, > > -- Thorsten -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: board-discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/ Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy
[board-discuss] Re: Libreoffice Vanilla
I lied - this is really the last comment: 32Bit binary! Why? Of the half dozen versions of LibreOffice I pulled off the MS Store this was the only one that showed up as 32bit - 64bit for all others evern the CIB branded binary. Sorry for the triple post On Tue, Mar 16, 2021 at 4:28 PM Drew Jensen wrote: > > Sorry, but one more comment: > > On the MS Store listing it would be good to actually show how long the > buyer will receive updates. > I have in my notes that it is 18 mos, but that came IIRC from the ML > and nowhere on the store listing is that spelled out, at least not > that I can find. > > Thanks again > > On Tue, Mar 16, 2021 at 3:29 PM Drew Jensen > wrote: > > > > Howdy, > > > > I paid for LibreOffice Vanilla from the MS Store last July and I now > > have a few comments and a question. > > > > I see reference in the application to making a donation to TDF. > > Why would I do that (donate) after I already purchased a license? > > (I also purchased LO powered by CIB and Collabora Office and neither > > include these references to making a donation to TDF; why would LOV be > > different? Because it cost $5 less?) > > > > It would be nice if somewhere, either at the MS Store listing or in > > the application, if there was an actual link to a contact at the > > publisher, ie CIB. > > > > Question; Last week TDF put out a statement that LibreOffice 7.0 is > > now considered the proper release for all users. Can I assume that my > > copy of LibreOffice Vanilla 6.4 will be upgraded to 7.0 shortly? > > > > Thank You > > > > Drew -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: board-discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/ Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy
[board-discuss] Re: Libreoffice Vanilla
Sorry, but one more comment: On the MS Store listing it would be good to actually show how long the buyer will receive updates. I have in my notes that it is 18 mos, but that came IIRC from the ML and nowhere on the store listing is that spelled out, at least not that I can find. Thanks again On Tue, Mar 16, 2021 at 3:29 PM Drew Jensen wrote: > > Howdy, > > I paid for LibreOffice Vanilla from the MS Store last July and I now > have a few comments and a question. > > I see reference in the application to making a donation to TDF. > Why would I do that (donate) after I already purchased a license? > (I also purchased LO powered by CIB and Collabora Office and neither > include these references to making a donation to TDF; why would LOV be > different? Because it cost $5 less?) > > It would be nice if somewhere, either at the MS Store listing or in > the application, if there was an actual link to a contact at the > publisher, ie CIB. > > Question; Last week TDF put out a statement that LibreOffice 7.0 is > now considered the proper release for all users. Can I assume that my > copy of LibreOffice Vanilla 6.4 will be upgraded to 7.0 shortly? > > Thank You > > Drew -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: board-discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/ Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy
[board-discuss] Libreoffice Vanilla
Howdy, I paid for LibreOffice Vanilla from the MS Store last July and I now have a few comments and a question. I see reference in the application to making a donation to TDF. Why would I do that (donate) after I already purchased a license? (I also purchased LO powered by CIB and Collabora Office and neither include these references to making a donation to TDF; why would LOV be different? Because it cost $5 less?) It would be nice if somewhere, either at the MS Store listing or in the application, if there was an actual link to a contact at the publisher, ie CIB. Question; Last week TDF put out a statement that LibreOffice 7.0 is now considered the proper release for all users. Can I assume that my copy of LibreOffice Vanilla 6.4 will be upgraded to 7.0 shortly? Thank You Drew -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: board-discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/ Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy
Re: [board-discuss] 'Free Beer' Office?
On Sat, Jul 25, 2020 at 11:44 AM toki wrote: > > On 2020/07/25 07:58, Andreas Mantke wrote: > > for those who complains about LibreOffice campains stating free (like > > free beer), here is a current example from the official LibreOffice account: > > > > https://twitter.com/libreoffice/status/128692953570496/photo/1 > > Both "No Registration" and "No Vendor Lock-in" are about libre, not > gratis. "No Forced Payments" could be either gratis, or libre. True - on the other hand if you look at the LibreOffice Twitter account bio the first word after the URL is 'Free' - it sets the tone. > > Italo Vignoli's _2020/2025 Marketing Communications Plan (with > additional comments)_ Slide 15: "Digital sovereignty issue will become > pervasive". This is something that LibreOffice marketing should > emphasize. The "No ~" image hints at it, but doesn't make it explicit. > > Your cloud, your language, your documents, your way. > > jonathon > > -- > To unsubscribe e-mail to: board-discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org > Problems? > https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ > Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette > List archive: https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/ > Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy > -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: board-discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/ Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy
Re: [board-discuss] Invitation to public TDF board meeting on Friday, March 13th at 1300 Berlin time
Got it, thanks. I was planning on joining the call to support Franklin's ideas on Document Freedom Day. Will look forward to hearing about this also. Thanks On Wed, Mar 11, 2020 at 3:17 PM Michael Meeks wrote: > Hi Drew, > > On 11/03/2020 17:43, Drew Jensen wrote: > > I was wondering about the 'FOSDEM goals' is there something that should > > be read before that meeting or is the meeting meant to introduce them? > > The latter =) the old & new boards came up with some key goals for > the > year a month or go or so at FOSDEM - we intended to publish them at the > time, but havn't got to it yet. > > Hopefully we can get to that, > > ATB, > > Michael. > > -- > michael.me...@collabora.com <><, GM Collabora Productivity > Hangout: mejme...@gmail.com, Skype: mmeeks > (M) +44 7795 666 147 - timezone usually UK / Europe >
Re: [board-discuss] Invitation to public TDF board meeting on Friday, March 13th at 1300 Berlin time
Howdy, I was wondering about the 'FOSDEM goals' is there something that should be read before that meeting or is the meeting meant to introduce them? Thanks Drew On Wed, Mar 11, 2020 at 12:45 PM Florian Effenberger < flo...@documentfoundation.org> wrote: > Dear community, > > find below the public agenda for the > > TDF board meeting > with a public part, followed by a private part > on Friday, March 13th at 1300 Berlin time > > For time zone conversion, see e.g. > > https://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/converted.html?iso=20200313T13=37=136=241=589 > > at https://jitsi.documentfoundation.org/TDFBoard > (We'll use https://meet.jit.si/TDFBoard only as fallback.) > > Public Part > > 1. Q: Answering Questions from the community (Lothar and Franklin, > max. 20 minutes) > > Rationale: Provide an opportunity for the community to ask questions > to the new board and about TDF. > > 2. Finalizing and publishing the FOSDEM goals (Lothar, Franklin 10min) > > Rationale: clarifying todos, timeline > Proposal: reread and cluster FOSDEM goals for publishing, Blog about > Goals in the next 14 days, instantiation of a tracking tool for the goals > > 3. Take over Document Freedom Day campaign by TDF (Franklin, 10min) > > Rational: discuss take over, checking about consensus to do, next > steps (vote via email?) > > 4. Status quo about Pending Actions (Lothar 5min) > > Rational: clarifying todos, timeline > > Looking forward to hear you on Friday! > > Florian > > -- > Florian Effenberger, Executive Director (Geschäftsführer) > Tel: +49 30 5557992-50 | Mail: flo...@documentfoundation.org > The Document Foundation, Kurfürstendamm 188, 10707 Berlin, DE > Gemeinnützige rechtsfähige Stiftung des bürgerlichen Rechts > Legal details: https://www.documentfoundation.org/imprint > > -- > To unsubscribe e-mail to: board-discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org > Problems? > https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ > Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette > List archive: > https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/ > Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy > >
[board-discuss] Membership Committee position
In order to facilitate seating of all Membership Committee rolls via election by the Document Foundation general membership, I hereby resign my position on the committee. Sincerely, Drew Jensen -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to board-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [board-discuss] membership application/language and supporters
On Tue, 2012-05-22 at 08:25 -0500, Norbert Thiebaud wrote: On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 5:36 AM, sophie gautier.sop...@gmail.com wrote: This is what language communities are supposed to do : give those who don't speak English a chance to be part of the project. We can't rely only on English speaking people to grow the community and represent it every where in the world. This is why settling each of our actions on an i18n point of view first is very important. That conjure to me the following quote (from a brazillian TDF member on the aooo-dev ML) 4 - Suddenly, TDF was requesting that every person who wanted to be called a contributor should fill a agreement request in order to be recognized. So we became to be concerned about that huge amount of people who contributed and didn't want to fill a formal agreement to a foreign organization that don't speak their language and has a lot of channels, many of them obscured. 5 - In addition, people who we were fighting bacame key persons in TDF. One of them became a brazilian member of the BoD, with 70 votes, when brazilian accepted members in Brazil were less than 15 and most of them didn't vote for him. Which, to me, indicate that the language barrier is being use and abuse to mislead (*), and the underlying 'nationalism' is disturbing to me. the notion the TDF should be the UN with 'national representative' is pretty scary (**) :-( Hi Norbert I think you make too much of the statement from one person. Some people will leave in a huff, no matter what policies are in place. I also think that what you refer to as a problem with Nationalism is not, rather it is a problem with external organizations, and the relationship between them and TDF. No place is this more true, currently then in Brazil, but it is not exclusive to Brazil. It is true that these secondary (from the TDF perspective) organizations are predominantly defined, partly, by location and therefore Nation. //drew (*) TDF does not _require_ anything to 'contribute'. for code contribution we ask for the proper licensing... but that is true of nay project. member need to be contributors but contributors are not required to be member. For instance last time I checked Tor is not a member, yet he is undeniably a contributor. Sure, to become a member, one is asked to agree to the tenet of the organization one want to become a member of... nothing shocking about that... (**) the notion of 'brazillian' member is shocking to me, just like the notion of 'French' member or 'Finnish' member... a member is a member, his national origin is irrelevant. And voting for a BoD member based on such irrelevant criteria is disturbing to me.
Re: [board-discuss] MC minutes from 2012-03-19
On Wed, 2012-04-18 at 15:19 +0200, Volker Merschmann wrote: Hi, 2012/4/18 Florian Effenberger flo...@documentfoundation.org: find attached the meeting minutes from the MC meeting on March 19th. This message is to be archived by the BoD and its deputies. What about http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/TDF/Membership_Committee_Meetings#Meeting_Minutes ? I just realized that some minutes are missing there. Even a link to the minutes-mail in the archive should be added there. IMHO. Others? Hi Volker Yes, you are correct the page does need updates. I'll get about doing that, directly. Thanks //drew
Re: [board-discuss] Re: Community Bylaws
On Tue, 2012-02-28 at 21:31 +0100, Florian Effenberger wrote: Hi Drew, drewjensen wrote on 2012-02-28 20:47: I simply wanted to comment on one aspect of Florian's email - the idea that discussion regarding community by-laws was taking place in private. I personally can not imagine any scenario where such would be acceptable. what exactly are you referring to? The community bylaws have not even been drafted yet in the form we legally need them as defined in the statutes. Hi Florian From the first email in this thread: Hi, Charles-H.Schulz wrote on 2012-02-06 18:25: Private sending first. Attached are a set of similar yet simplified community bylaws. What was modified: sorry for being so late on this, Charles. Replying in public, since I think the topic is interesting to everyone. Does it make more sense now - also it need not be a major discussion, it's just a comment. //drew -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to board-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[board-discuss] General questions
Hi, A few questions: The Advisory Board 1 - Where would I find a rooster of what corporations constitute the board and who their representatives on the board are? 2 - Minutes from AB meetings, where would I find those? Current Budget (expenses paid primarily) 1 - Where, or when will financial statements become public, either for general availability (my preference but I know that cuts across the grain form many), or restricted to TDF membership? Apologies if this is just my lack of searching skills. Thanks, //drew -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to board-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [board-discuss] General questions
On Thu, 2012-02-23 at 20:46 -0600, Norbert Thiebaud wrote: On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 5:07 PM, drew d...@baseanswers.com wrote: Hi, A few questions: The Advisory Board 1 - Where would I find a rooster of what corporations constitute the board and who their representatives on the board are? I think the list has been advertised... So did I, but darned if I can find where. but I not sure the actual names of the people delegated to represent such companies are relevant. An AB seat is bound to the sponsoring entity, and they get to designate whom-ever they want at any time to represent them. AB is the only entity where people are not there as individual but as representative of some other entity. So I agree that the list of entity should be public, but the individual's name of the representative... not so sure it is required. Right enough - just wanted to understand who represents TDF in those meetings? [this point I may have just overlooked in my reading] Then, how does what comes from those meetings work it's way to the general membership? 2 - Minutes from AB meetings, where would I find those? I don't think that such minutes are published, nor should they. Actually public minutes are specifically mentioned on the wiki pages discussing setting up the AB - though I, like you , expect to see them heavily redacted and that is also covered on the wiki pages. If you want honest and frank advices/opinions from big corporation, you can't have these advice being published publicly. Similarly in order to get advice from these actors, I expect our representatives to present to them ideas, line of inquiry, nascent projects that are being considered... most of them in a state of development that would render them premature for public disclosure at that time... So once you remove all that meat from the minutes, you would be left with nothing substantive... I don't see the point. I feel strongly however, that who and when are important to have out there. Current Budget (expenses paid primarily) 1 - Where, or when will financial statements become public, either for general availability (my preference but I know that cuts across the grain form many), or restricted to TDF membership? Since we are collection money from the public, under charitable status, I think we should publish publicly at least a top-level 'Income Statement' and Balance Sheet. Members on the other hand should have the ability to audit the full detailed accounting ledger, provided some confidentiality requirement (every member is entitled to see the books, but not to publish or disclose to non-member information contained herein that has not otherwise been made public. the idea is to empower the membership to trust-but-verify, not to allow competing entity to gain inside knowledge) Yes - I'd be in favor of public top level figures but for details, absolutely there should be a condition of confidentiality. Otoh the stifung was just created... up to now the accounting were somehow mixed with frodev... so I would no expect to have anything published for a while. Realistically public disclosure of some accounting would prolly be an end-of-fiscal-year event... since the work needed is already done for tax purpose it would not be an extra burden on our volunteers. I'd fall of my chair if someone said, 'it's all put together already' - though end-of-year figures with nothing but sub totals is no real disclosure, IMO. Norbert //drew -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to board-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [board-discuss] call recordings or only minutes?
On Mon, 2012-01-16 at 09:30 -0600, Norbert Thiebaud wrote: On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 9:18 AM, Florian Effenberger flo...@documentfoundation.org wrote: Hello, I was wondering whether we should upload call recordings as we did in the past, or only keep them internally until the minutes are done, and then upload them to the wiki. I seriously doubt anyone listens to the recordings, as the minutes provide a much easier way to keep up to date. actually, I do, when I'm not on the call itself... Norbert same here.. I'd like to see the recordings stay. //drew -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to board-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [board-discuss] [RESULT] New Membership Committee voted by the board
On Wed, 2011-11-09 at 14:08 +0100, Thorsten Behrens wrote: Dear candidates, as logged here https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/TDF/BoD_Decisions the TDF board of directors has now formally approved the following individuals as members of the new Membership committee: * Andre Schnabel * Fridrich Strba * Norbert Thiebaud * Simon Phipps * Sophie Gautier and the following individuals as their deputies: * Cor Nouws * Drew Jensen We would like to ask all successful candidates to formally accept their vote, by replying to this email. I do and am looking forward to not just helping but the chance to learn even more about our global community. Best wishses, Drew Deputy-Dawg Jensen -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to board-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [board-discuss] Vote for MC ...
On Tue, 2011-11-08 at 14:42 +0100, Volker Merschmann wrote: Hi, 2011/11/8 Michael Meeks michael.me...@suse.com: Hi Volker, On Tue, 2011-11-08 at 11:19 +0100, Volker Merschmann wrote: Either way - we should put this to a vote on the public list. I offered my help as I thought form the discussions that more persons are really needed. If this is not really the case, I am fine with withdrawing my offer. Sorry about that; thanks for volunteering hopefully you'll stand for the next MC election ? :-) Yes of course, I do. Hello Volker That's good to hear - I have no doubt you are a great fit for this role. Best wishes, Drew Jensen -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to board-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [board-discuss] Membership Committee
Howdy Micheal, et al, On Thu, 2011-11-03 at 16:59 +, Michael Meeks wrote: Hi Drew, On Wed, 2011-11-02 at 10:57 -0400, drew wrote: snip It was my intent to run for a seat on the MC, it is my understanding now that the elections will be moved to next year (the reasons seem quite reasonable IM). Oh - sorry that was a spoke in your wheels. Hopefully that'll get fixed in a few more (hectic) months. as I said, the rational for the change makes sense to me. If I understand correctly there is however one slot currently not filled, for a generic deputy. If this is correct then I would like to offer my services for this position. That's right. Of course, the board will need to approve the lucky (haha) candidates in due course ;-) You have my vote - based on the great work I've seen you doing. Thanks Having said that - we've sounded out previous appointees more informally beforehand, which is perhaps harder here. Clearly this is a responsible role, and part of our formal governance. As such, some may have queries about your involvement with the Apache project, it'd be helpful to know what your plans are there. Huh, it never crossed my mind that this would come up...ok, reality. Well, my plans - truthfully I'm not sure how my activity will progressive within the Apache OpenOffice poddling. Presently I'm not really doing anything there, my intent is to help out some with support and QA tasks - if I can incorporate that into my schedule in such a way that my efforts are useful I'll continue and if not quietly remove myself from the project management committee. Surely I could expand on my ideas of the two projects but am not at all certain that would add much to the decision process here - I will add just this, I don't feel that I would have any problem compartmentalizing my activities between the two projects and should it arise that there is some conflict would quickly take steps to resolve it, as needed. If there are any other concerns on this point please, anyone, feel free to ask and I will take the time to address them as best I can. Similarly, it'd be nice to know your thoughts on the membership committee's role, criteria for membership etc. in the bylaws. If you'd feel happier sharing that privately - feel free, and I'll make sure it gets to the board. snip (In the sniped paragraph) You use the term administrative task and I would say that this particular role is and should be best described by just such wording. In my understanding of the by-laws as written the goal of the membership committee is first and foremost to ensure that a fair and sensible measure is applied during the decision process regarding an individual's meritocratic contributions to the foundation's activities. I believe that I bring a number of personal attributes that fit quite well to such a task. A good general understanding of all the processes that go into growing and maintaining our community and our projects/products. A good working relationship with many of the individuals that make up the foundation, both the official membership and our broader group of supports. The above will help to expeditiously process the applications. Finally - IMO I also bring a good sensibility to such a task, meaning that while I have no problem making my own decisions I try not to be dogmatic, remaining open and receptive to input from the other people involved on tasks. Once again if there are any questions from anyone else please do not hesitate to ask. Sincerely, Drew Jensen -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to board-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [board-discuss] List renamed to board-discuss@documentfoundation.org
On Wed, 2011-11-02 at 14:19 +0100, Florian Effenberger wrote: Hi, Florian Effenberger wrote on 2011-11-02 14:14: as previously announced, this list has been renamed to board-discuss@documentfoundation.org Drew: Can you adjust nabble? Thanks! ;) Done //drew -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to board-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[steering-discuss] Limited Access lists ( was List discussion purpose )
On Fri, 2011-08-12 at 12:42 -0400, drew wrote: snip Alright - referring to another email, since I poked the nest I'll take the task of creating a wiki page - no URLs. Created this page http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Lists/limited_access set reference to the page from http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Website#Communication_Channels //drew -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [steering-discuss] List discussion purpose
On Fri, 2011-08-12 at 17:48 +0200, Florian Effenberger wrote: Hi, yep, your list is correct. Is it exhaustive? Tanks, Drew Some details: Charles-H. Schulz wrote on 2011-08-12 16:20: SC private Contains of steering committee plus deputies, plus a few people who have been involved in the discussion of setting up a foundation, even before TDF was born. Recipient list should be re-defined by the new board of directors then, it's their decision who should stay on the list and who shouldn't. AB private Contains advisory board representatives, plus all the steering committee members and deputies. Web infrastructure Contains all the administrators (everyone who has root access, that is). Security Contains LibreOffice developers, and representatives of various distributions. Marketing private (for pr drafting and readiness) Currently has a list of local team representatives, we're right in the process of setting up a marketing network to determine/add recipients. I would not propose to add these lists to our main mailing list page - I am not too keen of revealing the URLs and aliases, even if they are password protected. However, if someone wants to add the lists to a wiki page, feel free to do so. Hope that helps, Florian -- Florian Effenberger flo...@documentfoundation.org Steering Committee and Founding Member of The Document Foundation Tel: +49 8341 99660880 | Mobile: +49 151 14424108 Skype: floeff | Twitter/Identi.ca: @floeff -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [steering-discuss] List discussion purpose
On Thu, 2011-08-11 at 14:10 +0200, Charles-H. Schulz wrote: Hi, This is a short reminder about the purpose of this list. It has been setup to serve as the SC / BoD primary communication channel. Therefore it accomodates SC members requests from project members. While we do appreciate everyone's input we'd like to keep non-essential content on other lists. Hi Charles. With all due respect and specifically with regards to the last sentence above - perhaps having this list at all was a mistake. There is a private mailing list for the SC members use when _absolutely_ required, is there not? For all other items it seems appropriate to just use the same lists as the rest of us. Sincerely, Drew Jensen -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [steering-discuss] addition to trademark policy
On Wed, 2011-08-10 at 14:31 +0200, Thorsten Behrens wrote: Caolan McNamara wrote: Imho quite easy to resolve: use the community logos per default for builds from source. Enable the Logo with TDF tagline on build time and tell people to use this only when doing builds that are supposed to be distributed via TDF resources. that indeed sounds like a senseful idea. What do others think? Its the logical conclusion. Do we think this is a desirable thing however ? rather than a corner the rules paint us into that force maintainable of duplicate logos, etc. It makes the whole thing much more consistent, therefore it makes a lot of sense to me. The tm rule then boils down to: stuff from the official tdf/libo website - TDF mark permitted. Stuff from elsewhere: TDF mark not permitted, unless permission explicitely granted. +1 So, if OpenSUSE wants to use the TDF logo in the distro all they need do tis ask - but if 3 guys on an IRC channel decide to roll their own Linux Distro, then on day one it would be the Community Logo. [Side note - hopefully when future decisions are made to allow commercial operators to use the TDF mark the community will be involved in that decision, in some way] //drew -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [steering-discuss] Re: screen-shots Documentation Team
On Wed, 2011-07-13 at 15:31 +0200, Italo Vignoli wrote: Tom Davies wrote: I agree with Italo that the different teams have different requirements to achieve different results. As a member of the SC, I would personally avoid to have the SC discuss this issue (which, in my opinion, is not an issue). This is something that teams should discuss internally, and I see the SC get into the discussion only if something unreasonable happens. I will confirm and support this choice during the SC meeting. Hi Italo, I would like to agree with you on this point and also with Christoph's remarks, one email behind here, about the SC making only a suggestion, _if_ anything at all. Best wishes, Drew Jensen -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [steering-discuss] Request for official statement about dedicated logos for community groups
On Fri, 2011-07-01 at 00:35 +0200, Bernhard Dippold wrote: Hi Florian, all Florian Effenberger schrieb: Hi Bernhard, Bernhard Dippold wrote on 2011-06-10 00.25: There has been a reply by Sophie, but I didn't make out any formal SC discussion or decision on this topic. As this covers more than just design and visual identity questions (definition of teams, how to advertise teams and external groups) I don't think that this decision should be left to any of the teams like marketing or design. Hi Bernhard, I agree - but why kick it to the SC - why not start the discussion on the general discussion list and lets work out what it would mean to be a local team - what general rules folks would want in place, what responsibilities and requirements would be expected and the like. IMO right now any decision about a logo policy is premature, whether it is by your team, marketing or the SC, on this particular point - as there is still no definition of what a local team is, what it can and can not do. The use of a custom logo is only one piece of that. I know that there never seems to be enough time for these kinds of discussions, but that is never going to change - so speaking for myself I would make time this coming week to actively engage in a discussion and work on putting a draft together on the wiki with what comes out of such a discussion. It's also obvious that the clock is ticking on this issue, the folks in Paraguay are off and running from what I can see, folks (or folk) in Venezuela are eager to get going, the German team has always been in place and dominates here I'm really concerned that if only a logo use policy is put in place there is a chance for continued problems from misunderstanding what the use of such a logo will imply. Then afterwards that draft could be presented to the SC for adoption. snip Thanks, //drew -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [steering-discuss] Request for official statement about dedicated logos for community groups
Sorry guys that was supposed to be a draft - not a send... On Fri, 2011-07-01 at 12:24 -0400, drew wrote: On Fri, 2011-07-01 at 00:35 +0200, Bernhard Dippold wrote: Hi Florian, all Florian Effenberger schrieb: Hi Bernhard, Bernhard Dippold wrote on 2011-06-10 00.25: There has been a reply by Sophie, but I didn't make out any formal SC discussion or decision on this topic. As this covers more than just design and visual identity questions (definition of teams, how to advertise teams and external groups) I don't think that this decision should be left to any of the teams like marketing or design. Hi Bernhard, I agree - but why kick it to the SC - why not start the discussion on the general discussion list and lets work out what it would mean to be a local team - what general rules folks would want in place, what responsibilities and requirements would be expected and the like. IMO right now any decision about a logo policy is premature, whether it is by your team, marketing or the SC, on this particular point - as there is still no definition of what a local team is, what it can and can not do. The use of a custom logo is only one piece of that. I know that there never seems to be enough time for these kinds of discussions, but that is never going to change - so speaking for myself I would make time this coming week to actively engage in a discussion and work on putting a draft together on the wiki with what comes out of such a discussion. It's also obvious that the clock is ticking on this issue, the folks in Paraguay are off and running from what I can see, folks (or folk) in Venezuela are eager to get going, the German team has always been in place and dominates here I'm really concerned that if only a logo use policy is put in place there is a chance for continued problems from misunderstanding what the use of such a logo will imply. Then afterwards that draft could be presented to the SC for adoption. snip Thanks, //drew -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [steering-discuss] Request for official statement about dedicated logos for community groups
So the finished email follows: On Fri, 2011-07-01 at 12:35 -0400, drew wrote: Sorry guys that was supposed to be a draft - not a send... On Fri, 2011-07-01 at 12:24 -0400, drew wrote: On Fri, 2011-07-01 at 00:35 +0200, Bernhard Dippold wrote: Hi Florian, all Florian Effenberger schrieb: Hi Bernhard, Bernhard Dippold wrote on 2011-06-10 00.25: There has been a reply by Sophie, but I didn't make out any formal SC discussion or decision on this topic. As this covers more than just design and visual identity questions (definition of teams, how to advertise teams and external groups) I don't think that this decision should be left to any of the teams like marketing or design. Hi Bernhard, I agree - but why kick it to the SC - why not start the discussion on the general discussion list and lets work out what it would mean to be a local team - what general rules folks would want in place, what responsibilities and requirements would be expected and the like. IMO right now any decision about a logo policy is premature, whether it is by your team, marketing or the SC, on this particular point - as there is still no definition of what a local team is, what it can and can not do. The use of a custom logo is only one piece of that. I know that there never seems to be enough time for these kinds of discussions, but that is never going to change - so speaking for myself I would make time this coming week to actively engage in a discussion and work on putting a draft together on the wiki with what comes out of such a discussion. It's also obvious that the clock is ticking on this issue, the folks in Paraguay are off and running from what I can see, folks (or folk) in Venezuela are eager to get going, the German team has always been in place and hold a dominate position in our organization precisely because they where able to form a strong team, focused on their specific and local concerns during the previous decade. I'm really concerned that if only a logo use policy is put in place there is a chance for continued problems from misunderstanding what the use of such a logo will imply. Then afterwards that draft could be presented to the SC for adoption. snip Thanks, //drew -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
RE: [steering-discuss] Joining the OASIS Consortium
Thanks much for the details. //drew On Sat, 2011-06-18 at 15:42 -0700, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote: Since I am receiving reminders about my individual membership in OASIS, I can answer that question: No. There is no specific enrollment period or fixed calendar of memberships. Annual memberships are for the full year from the day a membership application is accepted. Since you are talking about an institutional membership, there will need to be an official who approves the participation of others on individual OASIS Technical Committees. Also, there are IP-policy conditions that apply to membership and contribution to each OASIS TC. TC members affiliated with TDF should not have a conflict with requirements that they are subject to as a condition of their employment elsewhere. I also don't know how closely associated someone must be with the TDF to be able to participate under the TDF membership in OASIS. If that is not clear from the application information for organizations, I am sure there are contacts who can answer any questions about that. - Dennis -Original Message- From: drew [mailto:d...@baseanswers.com] Sent: Saturday, June 18, 2011 11:24 To: steering-discuss@documentfoundation.org Subject: Re: [steering-discuss] Joining the OASIS Consortium On Sat, 2011-06-18 at 20:18 +0200, Florian Effenberger wrote: Hi, Charles-H. Schulz wrote on 2011-06-18 16.50: I think that if we go down that path we'll lose some valuable time revoting on it. The SC's mission ends when the BoD is elected and that is very clear, but until then, if decisions have to be made we should not refrain from making them. (Although I understand the need not to rush anything - but joining the OASIS is not exactly a rushed decision). well, I have no problem with deciding, but still, decisions are not binding for the future BoD, so we should keep that in mind. :-) Hi, Just wondering, is there some membership window, a period of time each year when new memberships are accepted at OASIS? Is that an issue here? Thanks Drew -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [steering-discuss] Reminder: TDF SC call in CW 20
On Mon, 2011-05-23 at 22:18 +0200, Italo Vignoli wrote: On 05/23/2011 10:06 PM, drew wrote: My email to you was an inquiry about budgets for general show material. snip In any case, we should have some budget for giveaways and other small marketing expenses. Hi, Yes, it would help to have some guidance, perhaps if only towards general expectations for planning purposes. To re-cap there are three upcoming events that I am reasonably certain about our ability to have a presence - OSCON [1] (not sure on size, large) in July, a linux fest[2] ( with ~1,000 ppl) in 2 weeks and another Linux fest[3] in September ( 1,000 ppl). Of those three I would say that all other things being equal I would recommend more TDF expenditure emphasis on OSCON, over the two linux fests. Of course that is contingent on what exactly we could put together for staffing at OSCON. Thanks and best wishes, Drew [1] http://www.oscon.com/oscon2011 [2] http://www.southeastlinuxfest.org/home [3] http://ohiolinux.org/ -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [steering-discuss] Reminder: TDF SC call in CW 20
On Mon, 2011-05-23 at 21:52 +0200, Italo Vignoli wrote: On 05/21/2011 12:02 PM, Florian Effenberger wrote: So, no general objection to the proposal, but more a new task seeking for volunteers, to draft a budget plan we can stick to. :) We should also start discussing some small marketing expenses. Drew has spent 50 bucks for a table at a Linux expo, and we should be able to refund such a small amount of money. Ah, I never said that - in fact the last email from the SELF organizers was: I think we're all happy LibreOffice saved the OO.org effort from Oracle doom, and they're still getting organized themselves, I don't think there will be much objection to comp'ing LibreOffice a booth My email to you was an inquiry about budgets for general show material. I'm covering travel and lodging expenses for for 2 of us (~650.00 USD) and do not expect reimbursement, but I can not cover swag on top of that. Thanks Drew -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[steering-discuss] Re: [es-marketing] Re: User Groups in each country approved LibreOffice
On Sun, 2011-04-24 at 14:05 -0430, Daniel Gonzalez wrote: On 04/12/2011 08:02 AM, Daniel Gonzalez wrote: Hi all I wonder if there are any process to validate a LUG or TDF Group LibreOffice users in a given country. Venezuela is being born in a group of users after Flisol LibreOffice Caracas and one of the questions that we asked is whether the stand we had and the group that was building had approval by TDF. So far there hispanic community encompassing all Spanish-speaking countries but I think it is necessary to jump to something more localized due to local activities that may be generated in each country. Saying? Greetings Hi Guys Sorry to insist on this thread, but I think it is very important to the community in general LibreOffice Hi All, I believe that is correct. snip I also think that the best way to integrate the Hispanic community in our case -Use the local user groups in each country to attract people to government projects as The Hispanic Community LibreOffice -Centralize the efforts and resources around TDF through local user groups. -Use existing resources supported by TDF such as mailing lists, irc channel, forums, wiki, among others. The local user groups must not use existing resources and approved by TDF PS: I know no other person particularly in Venezuela that LibreOffice collaborating on the project, this can occur for many reasons. 1 .- Do not know how to collaborate in the project LibreOffice. 2 .- Do not want to collaborate. 3 .- Do not know about LibreOffice. 4 .- many others. Is that local user groups in each country can be a great benefit to the community Global LibreOffice My offering here would be to not emphasis the national aspect so much, which is to say that a group could be at a national level in some places, however I can see places where could be multiple groups active within a nation, or a group that encompassed more then one national boundary. The key is the people - you say that there is no other person in Venezuela active promoting/support LibO/TDF - but I'm not sure declaring a Venezuela User Group is the only option, perhaps you would be best served by focusing on an even smaller region, your city or province (state, not sure the term there). I can't, nor can anyone, really answer that question directly for you. My opinion is that a team, or a group, to be call itself such requires more then one person. So one person can say - Hey I want to start a team/local group, and start trying to recruit other like minded individuals to join in with you. If the idea as merit there will be others found, but on a pragmatic note you have to assume you, the person trying to organize the team, is going to be doing most everything your self at first. anyway - I only wanted to comment on that one point - this idea of local teams being national based, looking at a broad policy I would not necessarily, or at all, use that as a basis, I think some places that would happen. @Daniel, I'll back up and comment on some of your other points in further emails. Thanks Drew -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [us-marketing] Re: [steering-discuss] Re: User Groups in each country approved LibreOffice
On Thu, 2011-05-05 at 10:19 -0400, drew wrote: On Thu, 2011-05-05 at 15:32 +0300, sophie wrote: snip I already gave my opinion on this topic to Daniel and Daniel, so they know that I'm all for their action. I'm the one battling the most I think for the language groups to be the only official representation in the project, Hi Sophie, others Alright - this is the part I find difficult to reconcile only official representation. Naturally there are certain functions here, such as translations where the language based association of individuals should make a team and that team should have responsibility for that function. sorry - poor typing However, once you step past translation work I do not see the clear line that says this group has official responsibilities with other functions performed. Could you expand on that for me, what you mean by 'only official representation' - it would help me understand. but I completely understand the needs for local marketing and support. So of course, I support the creation of the material you're designing and also really appreciate your work on this. As I tell you, there is already various associations existing in different countries that support local actions, more or less officially representing LibreOffice. I would like that we have a more clear and defined affiliation and support between these associations and the TDF, but I didn't get the time to think enough about it yet. In any way, if you want to set such associations in Venezuela or Argentina, I don't see any issue. If I follow what you are saying - if you create a legal entity of some kind, outside of TDF, and then want to work with us that is OK - that is a fairly high bar to set, IMO. Thanks Drew -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [steering-discuss] SC call recording from CW 16 online
On Fri, 2011-04-22 at 13:28 +0200, Florian Effenberger wrote: Hello, the SC call recording from calendar week 16 is online at http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/TDF/Steering_Committee_Meetings#Minutes_2011-04-21 Hello Florian Thanks for seeing to this for everyones benefit. There seems to be a problem with the last two meeting recordings however, each after download is 16.01 K in size. Neither is recognized by any player I possess. I would appreciate it if you wouldn't mind checking that, when you have a chance. Best wishes, Drew -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [steering-discuss] Trademark Policy - Final?
On Thu, 2011-03-03 at 22:49 +0100, Charles-H. Schulz wrote: er... almost. We're voting/fixing the latest bugs. Hello Charles, Well I'll just have to be patient then...*smile*..I must admit there was one interesting, to me anyway, late edit, which I didn't expect. It would be great if you could give a high sign when the actual vote is finished. Thanks very much, Drew Jensen -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [steering-discuss] Approval of our Trademark Policy
On Fri, 2011-03-04 at 00:12 +0100, Christoph Noack wrote: Hi Charles, hi all! LOGO POLICY I've overhauled the logo policy, although the naming of some items seems still to be strange (I'd like to have some shorter names like: TDF Logo, Community Logo - or something like that). http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Logo_Policy Hi, Well which is it - is the community logo w/registered trademark, mark or not? - it is both ways on the wiki page above - PNG w/out any mark, SVG with 'registered trademark, while on the trademark policy page it seems that maybe it is just a tm that is appropriate at this time. Thanks so much, in advance Drew Jensen -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
[steering-discuss] Re: [us-marketing] Reminder: Marketing ConfCall in 5 hours
On Thu, 2011-01-20 at 12:47 +0100, Florian Effenberger wrote: I explicitly do *not* want to talk about the Drupal topic in this call, please let's focus on the 3.3 release first. I totally agree - -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [steering-discuss] ODFAuthors live!
On Sat, 2011-01-15 at 21:32 +0300, sophie wrote: Hi Olivier On 15/01/2011 21:07, Olivier Hallot wrote: Hi all, This is an interesting news that passed too quickly among the LO folks. I think we should say some king words on their initiative and advertise it stronger in our lists and channels. http://www.odfauthors.org Well, it seems it has not been announced yet by Jean (I was with Florian too early also ;-). May be we should just wait for Jean, Sigrid or Andreas to make the official announcement and then, bring the support you mentioned. Hi, Jean announced the site open today on the mailing list there. - already pushed a blog entry and a few tweets on it...but a more official one would be nice. Thanks, Drew -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [steering-discuss] libreoffice.org e-mail accounts
On Fri, 2011-01-14 at 20:53 +0300, sophie wrote: Hi, On 14/01/2011 20:33, Volker Merschmann wrote: [...] For the rest: I do not like any of the offered domain names, they all are too long. I would like to see nickn...@libreoffice.org for the members. Agreed with Volker here, wouldn't be possible to have it as simple as nickn...@libreoffice.org? Other wise, my preferred choice would go to volunteer.nickn...@libreofficecommunity.org for the same concern as Christian's brain ones ;) Howdy, If you are going to issue email addresses just use the real name, if the risk is perceived as large then just say no. If you decide to issue these vanity email addresses I can see for leading word volunteer: nickn...@libreofficecommunity.org is a better choice IMO. Adios, Drew -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [steering-discuss] libreoffice.org e-mail accounts
On Fri, 2011-01-14 at 23:47 +0100, Christoph Noack wrote: Hi all! Am Freitag, den 14.01.2011, 20:45 +0100 schrieb Italo Vignoli: On 1/14/11 8:21 PM, Olivier Hallot wrote: So, nickn...@libreoffice.org Leave the mail for TDF oficials as @documetnfoundation.org I totally agree with Olivier. Just to make the concept stronger, and to protect us from possible email trolls, we can add a specific paragraph in the bylaws. Yep, agree as well. (Especially since we'll never get rid of less informed people who spread strange information ... independent of any email address.) And if there are still some concerns, my proposal would be: forename.lastn...@community.libreoffice.org Howdy, I like that construct. You could also flip the problem or solution on it's head. Instead of an adornment such to remove authority use it to state it. forename.lastn...@bod.documentfounation.org forename.lastn...@esc.documentfounation.org Part of taking responsibility for the role is receiving such an address, when or if your roll reverts to community member only. nickn...@libreoffice.org Perhaps a special case of: forename.lastn...@documentfounation.org for paid staff. Just a thought - but again Christoph's change is pretty good IMO if that is the way you choose to go IMO. //drew -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [steering-discuss] By-Laws / BOD elections
On Tue, 2010-11-16 at 15:40 +0100, Charles-H. Schulz wrote: Members get the right to vote, and to elect other Members, on a one member, one vote basis - that really was the question, not specific logistics. Great, no need to follow up any further on this here, for me. Best wishes, Drew -- E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org for instructions on how to unsubscribe List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/steering-discuss/ All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
