Re: [board-discuss] [DECISION] Delayed atticization for LibreOffice Online
Hi Daniel, thanks for your reply. I'll add issues to the project thus you (and other volunteers) could look for suitable tasks. Best, Andreas Am 30.08.22 um 23:25 schrieb Daniel A. Rodriguez: Oh, I had not understood it that way. If so, count me in. El 30/8/22 a las 13:01, Andreas Mantke escribió: Hi Daniel, I think there is wide field of tasks available, not only tasks for hacking on source code. And also doing smaller task will help to drive the project forward. Best, Andreas Am 29.08.22 um 21:59 schrieb Daniel A. Rodriguez: I wish I could but, unfortunately, that task is out of my scope. However, it's important to highlight that there's an ongoing work. El 29 de agosto de 2022 3:02:33 p. m. GMT-03:00, Andreas Mantke escribió: Hi Daniel, hi all, Am 29.08.22 um 14:51 schrieb drodrig...@libreoffice.org: El 29.08.2022 07:44, Mike Saunders escribió: Hi all, We still have this page on the site: https://www.libreoffice.org/download/libreoffice-online/ ...which has been the same for a very long time. We could update it to say that we're considering the future of LOOL (linking to this mailing list post), and see if people are interested in contributing. What do people think? Mike From my POV, yes. At least to show that there are people interested in the existence of such a version. You could join the work on that project currently on Github: https://github.com/freeonlineoffice/online I plan to move the work to the LibreOffice project ressources back later. Currently I don't want to work under the sword of Damocles on TDF ressources and had to move forth and back again. And there is no shortage of tasks from different kind. Thus every helping hand is very welcome! ;-) Regards, Andreas -- ## Free Software Advocate ## Plone add-on developer ## My blog:http://www.amantke.de/blog -- 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 -- ## Free Software Advocate ## Plone add-on developer ## My blog: http://www.amantke.de/blog -- Uso LibreOffice, por privacidad, seguridad y control de mis datos. Da un vistazo a la mejor suite de oficina: https://es.libreoffice.org O únete a la Comunidad Hispana: https://matrix.to/#/#hispanos:documentfoundation.org -- ## Free Software Advocate ## Plone add-on developer ## My blog: http://www.amantke.de/blog -- 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] [DECISION] Delayed atticization for LibreOffice Online
Oh, I had not understood it that way. If so, count me in. El 30/8/22 a las 13:01, Andreas Mantke escribió: Hi Daniel, I think there is wide field of tasks available, not only tasks for hacking on source code. And also doing smaller task will help to drive the project forward. Best, Andreas Am 29.08.22 um 21:59 schrieb Daniel A. Rodriguez: I wish I could but, unfortunately, that task is out of my scope. However, it's important to highlight that there's an ongoing work. El 29 de agosto de 2022 3:02:33 p. m. GMT-03:00, Andreas Mantke escribió: Hi Daniel, hi all, Am 29.08.22 um 14:51 schrieb drodrig...@libreoffice.org: El 29.08.2022 07:44, Mike Saunders escribió: Hi all, We still have this page on the site: https://www.libreoffice.org/download/libreoffice-online/ ...which has been the same for a very long time. We could update it to say that we're considering the future of LOOL (linking to this mailing list post), and see if people are interested in contributing. What do people think? Mike From my POV, yes. At least to show that there are people interested in the existence of such a version. You could join the work on that project currently on Github: https://github.com/freeonlineoffice/online I plan to move the work to the LibreOffice project ressources back later. Currently I don't want to work under the sword of Damocles on TDF ressources and had to move forth and back again. And there is no shortage of tasks from different kind. Thus every helping hand is very welcome! ;-) Regards, Andreas -- ## Free Software Advocate ## Plone add-on developer ## My blog:http://www.amantke.de/blog -- 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 -- ## Free Software Advocate ## Plone add-on developer ## My blog: http://www.amantke.de/blog -- Uso LibreOffice, por privacidad, seguridad y control de mis datos. Da un vistazo a la mejor suite de oficina: https://es.libreoffice.org O únete a la Comunidad Hispana: https://matrix.to/#/#hispanos:documentfoundation.org
Re: [board-discuss] [DECISION] Delayed atticization for LibreOffice Online
Hi Daniel, I think there is wide field of tasks available, not only tasks for hacking on source code. And also doing smaller task will help to drive the project forward. Best, Andreas Am 29.08.22 um 21:59 schrieb Daniel A. Rodriguez: I wish I could but, unfortunately, that task is out of my scope. However, it's important to highlight that there's an ongoing work. El 29 de agosto de 2022 3:02:33 p. m. GMT-03:00, Andreas Mantke escribió: Hi Daniel, hi all, Am 29.08.22 um 14:51 schrieb drodrig...@libreoffice.org: El 29.08.2022 07:44, Mike Saunders escribió: Hi all, We still have this page on the site: https://www.libreoffice.org/download/libreoffice-online/ ...which has been the same for a very long time. We could update it to say that we're considering the future of LOOL (linking to this mailing list post), and see if people are interested in contributing. What do people think? Mike From my POV, yes. At least to show that there are people interested in the existence of such a version. You could join the work on that project currently on Github: https://github.com/freeonlineoffice/online I plan to move the work to the LibreOffice project ressources back later. Currently I don't want to work under the sword of Damocles on TDF ressources and had to move forth and back again. And there is no shortage of tasks from different kind. Thus every helping hand is very welcome! ;-) Regards, Andreas -- ## Free Software Advocate ## Plone add-on developer ## My blog:http://www.amantke.de/blog -- 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 -- ## Free Software Advocate ## Plone add-on developer ## My blog: http://www.amantke.de/blog -- 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] [DECISION] Delayed atticization for LibreOffice Online
I wish I could but, unfortunately, that task is out of my scope. However, it's important to highlight that there's an ongoing work. El 29 de agosto de 2022 3:02:33 p. m. GMT-03:00, Andreas Mantke escribió: >Hi Daniel, hi all, > >Am 29.08.22 um 14:51 schrieb drodrig...@libreoffice.org: >> El 29.08.2022 07:44, Mike Saunders escribió: >>> Hi all, >>> >>> We still have this page on the site: >>> >>> https://www.libreoffice.org/download/libreoffice-online/ >>> >>> ...which has been the same for a very long time. We could update it to >>> say that we're considering the future of LOOL (linking to this mailing >>> list post), and see if people are interested in contributing. What do >>> people think? >>> >>> Mike >> >> >> From my POV, yes. At least to show that there are people interested in >> the existence of such a version. >> >You could join the work on that project currently on Github: >https://github.com/freeonlineoffice/online > >I plan to move the work to the LibreOffice project ressources back >later. Currently I don't want to work under the sword of Damocles on TDF >ressources and had to move forth and back again. > >And there is no shortage of tasks from different kind. Thus every >helping hand is very welcome! ;-) > >Regards, >Andreas > >-- >## Free Software Advocate >## Plone add-on developer >## My blog: http://www.amantke.de/blog > > >-- >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] [DECISION] Delayed atticization for LibreOffice Online
Hi Daniel, hi all, Am 29.08.22 um 14:51 schrieb drodrig...@libreoffice.org: El 29.08.2022 07:44, Mike Saunders escribió: Hi all, We still have this page on the site: https://www.libreoffice.org/download/libreoffice-online/ ...which has been the same for a very long time. We could update it to say that we're considering the future of LOOL (linking to this mailing list post), and see if people are interested in contributing. What do people think? Mike From my POV, yes. At least to show that there are people interested in the existence of such a version. You could join the work on that project currently on Github: https://github.com/freeonlineoffice/online I plan to move the work to the LibreOffice project ressources back later. Currently I don't want to work under the sword of Damocles on TDF ressources and had to move forth and back again. And there is no shortage of tasks from different kind. Thus every helping hand is very welcome! ;-) Regards, Andreas -- ## Free Software Advocate ## Plone add-on developer ## My blog: http://www.amantke.de/blog -- 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] [DECISION] Delayed atticization for LibreOffice Online
El 29.08.2022 07:44, Mike Saunders escribió: Hi all, We still have this page on the site: https://www.libreoffice.org/download/libreoffice-online/ ...which has been the same for a very long time. We could update it to say that we're considering the future of LOOL (linking to this mailing list post), and see if people are interested in contributing. What do people think? Mike From my POV, yes. At least to show that there are people interested in the existence of such a version. -- 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] [DECISION] Delayed atticization for LibreOffice Online
Hi all, We still have this page on the site: https://www.libreoffice.org/download/libreoffice-online/ ...which has been the same for a very long time. We could update it to say that we're considering the future of LOOL (linking to this mailing list post), and see if people are interested in contributing. What do people think? Mike -- 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] [DECISION] Delayed atticization for LibreOffice Online
Hi Paolo, all, Am 02.08.22 um 11:34 schrieb Paolo Vecchi: Hi Andreas, thanks for keeping us up to date. On 30/07/2022 18:56, Andreas Mantke wrote: Here are the 'numbers' for July, 2022: - 1 volunteer - work done: small css fix and a typo fix in a markdown file. Any progress on your version of LOOL? Yes. I updated it with the available patches, worked on some further updates and am currently running a Docker build from source with the available script on openSUSE from the current status. I created already one docker file about two weeks ago from the status at that time. Is there a repository where the community can check the progress and start contributing to? Yes. https://github.com/freeonlineoffice/online Contributions and help welcome ;-) You can ping me (drop an email), if you want to join me. Kind regards, Andreas -- ## Free Software Advocate ## Plone add-on developer ## My blog: http://www.amantke.de/blog -- 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] [DECISION] Delayed atticization for LibreOffice Online
Hi Andreas, thanks for keeping us up to date. On 30/07/2022 18:56, Andreas Mantke wrote: Here are the 'numbers' for July, 2022: - 1 volunteer - work done: small css fix and a typo fix in a markdown file. Any progress on your version of LOOL? Is there a repository where the community can check the progress and start contributing to? Regards, Andreas Ciao Paolo -- Paolo Vecchi - Member of the Board of Directors The Document Foundation, Kurfürstendamm 188, 10707 Berlin, DE Gemeinnützige rechtsfähige Stiftung des bürgerlichen Rechts Legal details: https://www.documentfoundation.org/imprint OpenPGP_signature Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [board-discuss] [DECISION] Delayed atticization for LibreOffice Online
Hi all, although the July, 2022 is not finished yet, a short update on the amount of volunteer contributors to the fork of LibreOffice Online: Am 07.07.22 um 20:54 schrieb Andreas Mantke: (...) So lets have a look on the commits of the last four month of the fork (without the localization work, copied from Weblate): * March 2022: - 4 volunteers, one of them was already for long time active in the LibreOffice design team - work done: two lines in a readme, some lines of JS, CSS and icons * April 2022: - 4 volunteers, one of them is the long time active design team member, another one is a current member of the board with an JS one liner - work done: unify ui naming menubar js file, docker image build script, CSS and the one line in a JS file * May 2022: - 2 volunteers, one of them is the long time active design team member - work done: CSS * June 2022: - 2 volunteers, one of them is the long time active design team member - work done: CSS and an icon Noticeable: except the long time LibreOffice design contributor the volunteers committed only a very few patches and were only in one month active (without one of them, who submitted another patch in a second month, a further icon). Here are the 'numbers' for July, 2022: - 1 volunteer - work done: small css fix and a typo fix in a markdown file. Regards, Andreas -- ## Free Software Advocate ## Plone add-on developer ## My blog:http://www.amantke.de/blog -- 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] [DECISION] Delayed atticization for LibreOffice Online
El 07.07.2022 22:12, Paolo Vecchi escribió: Hi Daniel, On 07/07/2022 22:04, Daniel A. Rodriguez wrote: The long arm of the supervisor reaches several of us who dared to support the proposal to reopen the repo. In my case, trying to point out what can be said and what cannot. That's not good at all. Indeed. Have you received these types of notifications previously? Yep, from the very beginning of previous term. Several times, several people. Do you know of others that received communications that are meant to dissuade people from expressing their legitimate opinions? I have received some comments that imply that it is. So I encourage all those who have gone through similar situations to express their opinions. Even former directors. Would you, and anyone else that received similar communications, be willing to send a complaint to the CoC team or a trusted director for evaluation? Sure. Anything to have a better environment for us all. -- 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] [DECISION] Delayed atticization for LibreOffice Online
Hi Andreas, On 07/07/2022 20:54, Andreas Mantke wrote: It's odd you say that as IIRC Mr Meeks said that since they move the project to Microsoft GitHub they had more contributors. Are you by any chance able to substantiate your statement? I made a short research on the commits of about the last four month (the board decision has also only a three month period in mind). So lets have a look on the commits of the last four month of the fork (without the localization work, copied from Weblate): * March 2022: - 4 volunteers, one of them was already for long time active in the LibreOffice design team - work done: two lines in a readme, some lines of JS, CSS and icons * April 2022: - 4 volunteers, one of them is the long time active design team member, another one is a current member of the board with an JS one liner - work done: unify ui naming menubar js file, docker image build script, CSS and the one line in a JS file * May 2022: - 2 volunteers, one of them is the long time active design team member - work done: CSS * June 2022: - 2 volunteers, one of them is the long time active design team member - work done: CSS and an icon That doesn't seem like much to me. If that would be the level necessary to avoid to archiving LOOL then it would be very easy. Noticeable: except the long time LibreOffice design contributor the volunteers committed only a very few patches and were only in one month active (without one of them, who submitted another patch in a second month, a further icon). I guess we could set this a baseline metrics for keeping LOOL repository open. It seemed there is a big interest to set high barriers in that area and to block initiative. The condition applied are IMHO unfair as it sends out a message that could discourage many to even trying. The fact that the promoters of the vote in the ESC and the board didn't even sent out a notification about what was about to happen surely doesn't sends out the message that they wanted supporter of LOOL to have a fair chance of reviving the project. Even the number of voters in favour of that decision are fewer than those required to pass the barrier ;-) Yep. As stated in my answer to the "decision", it just needs to be re-run with a text that would allow the community a chance to do something. Are you anyway continuing to prepare a version of LOOL that could be presented a candidate to start creating a community around it? I'm working on that too, but that need some more time. I'm happy, if someone wants to join me and create e.g. a docker build from the source. Do you need technical help, computing resources, both? I wouldn't know from where to start in building it from source (sorry can't do everything) but maybe some community members with more experience than me could help out? Happy to lend you some resources on my infrastructure if that's what you need. And what I've learned within the communication during the last week(s). There is no open communication and part of the game is to lead you by the nose. Could you elaborate on that? I'm not sure I fully grasp the meaning of the above sentences. The last part of this 'communication strategy' reached me in private on July, 3rd at 7.29pm, when I was told that I should contribute objective reason / points to the debate around LOOL and the decision about its atticization for LibreOffice Online. And just some hours later on July, 4th, 3.11am the results of the decision were published on this list. I had also the impression that I'm in a extra supervision here (and with private emails). Odd that also Daniel said he received similar emails. Not sure if it's someone being overzealous in applying the 'communication strategy' or a way of sending another type of message. And as we are saying in Germany: Der Fisch stinkt vom Kopfe her. That's the same saying we use in Italy but it's not clear what you mean with it or to what/whom you are referring to. Hope the above helped a bit. It's very useful information but what would help even more is for the wider community to tell us clearly what they want. ... and naturally to see the result of your effort. Regards, Andreas Ciao Paolo -- ## Free Software Advocate ## Plone add-on developer ## My blog: http://www.amantke.de/blog -- Paolo Vecchi - Member of the Board of Directors The Document Foundation, Kurfürstendamm 188, 10707 Berlin, DE Gemeinnützige rechtsfähige Stiftung des bürgerlichen Rechts Legal details: https://www.documentfoundation.org/imprint OpenPGP_signature Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [board-discuss] [DECISION] Delayed atticization for LibreOffice Online
Hi Daniel, On 07/07/2022 22:04, Daniel A. Rodriguez wrote: The long arm of the supervisor reaches several of us who dared to support the proposal to reopen the repo. In my case, trying to point out what can be said and what cannot. That's not good at all. Have you received these types of notifications previously? Do you know of others that received communications that are meant to dissuade people from expressing their legitimate opinions? Would you, and anyone else that received similar communications, be willing to send a complaint to the CoC team or a trusted director for evaluation? Ciao Paolo -- Paolo Vecchi - Member of the Board of Directors The Document Foundation, Kurfürstendamm 188, 10707 Berlin, DE Gemeinnützige rechtsfähige Stiftung des bürgerlichen Rechts Legal details: https://www.documentfoundation.org/imprint OpenPGP_signature Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [board-discuss] [DECISION] Delayed atticization for LibreOffice Online
Hi Paolo, Paolo Vecchi wrote on 06/07/2022 22:46: It's odd you say that as IIRC Mr Meeks said that since they move the What is the use of writing "Mr Meeks" please? It looks a bit odd to me, in a community where we simply say e.g. "Paolo". Or of course in case people possibly may not understand who Paolo is, "Paolo Vecchi". project to Microsoft GitHub they had more contributors. Why do you explicitly say "Microsoft GitHub"? Are there other GitHub's around that we may get confused with? As stated in my answer to the "decision", it just needs to be re-run with a text that would allow the community a chance to do something. I refer to my comments made on this list on July the 4th (and earlier on another one): no one is blocking anyone on working on the code and project they love. If the conditions in the decisions are not met in three months, the project will be atticizised. If conditions for de-atticizations (and those are similar) are met in four months, the repository will be de-atticizised. How beautiful and simple it that. Cheers, Cor -- Cor Nouws, member Board of Directors The Document Foundation, Kurfürstendamm 188, 10707 Berlin Gemeinnützige rechtsfähige Stiftung des bürgerlichen Rechts Legal details: http://www.documentfoundation.org/imprint GPD key ID: 0xB13480A6 - 591A 30A7 36A0 CE3C 3D28 A038 E49D 7365 B134 80A6 mobile : +31 (0)6 25 20 7001 skype : cornouws blog: cor4office-nl.blogspot.com jabber : cor4off...@jabber.org -- 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] [DECISION] Delayed atticization for LibreOffice Online
Hi Andreas, Andreas Mantke wrote on 06/07/2022 20:08: [1] https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/TDF/Policies/Attic#Deatticization_requirements it is very interesting to read this criteria and compare it with the git log of COOL. It seemed even this Github repo (project) didn't attract the number of volunteers, which are requested in the decision proposal. Where in the deatticization requirements do you read the word "volunteer"? This is a very interesting and obvious misreading of the rules. ... And as we are saying in Germany: Der Fisch stinkt vom Kopfe her. Looks so. Why are you doing this? Cheers, Cor -- Cor Nouws, member Board of Directors The Document Foundation, Kurfürstendamm 188, 10707 Berlin Gemeinnützige rechtsfähige Stiftung des bürgerlichen Rechts Legal details: http://www.documentfoundation.org/imprint GPD key ID: 0xB13480A6 - 591A 30A7 36A0 CE3C 3D28 A038 E49D 7365 B134 80A6 mobile : +31 (0)6 25 20 7001 skype : cornouws blog: cor4office-nl.blogspot.com jabber : cor4off...@jabber.org -- 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] [DECISION] Delayed atticization for LibreOffice Online
El 7 de julio de 2022 3:54:59 p. m. GMT-03:00, Andreas Mantke escribió: >Hi Paolo, all, > >although I have not too much spare time for a research I try to answer >your questions. > > >Am 06.07.22 um 22:46 schrieb Paolo Vecchi: >> Hi Andreas, >> >> On 06/07/2022 20:08, Andreas Mantke wrote: >>> Hi all, >>> >>> Am 04.07.22 um 03:11 schrieb Thorsten Behrens: Dear community, the following vote happened after our Monday board call, on request as a private email vote: > The board sees positive & constructive news around renewed > developer interest in LibreOffice Online. To further encourage > initiatives to collaborate on a single, TDF-hosted repository, the > board resolves to postpone formally atticizing Online for three > more months. Unless the de-atticization requirements [1] (3 > different developers contributing non-trivially) are fulfilled by > then, and/or if necessary binding corporate commitments are not > made by 2022-10-01, Online will be automatically moved to the > attic. > > [1] > https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/TDF/Policies/Attic#Deatticization_requirements > >>> it is very interesting to read this criteria and compare it with the git >>> log of COOL. It seemed even this Github repo (project) didn't attract >>> the number of volunteers, which are requested in the decision proposal. >> >> It's odd you say that as IIRC Mr Meeks said that since they move the >> project to Microsoft GitHub they had more contributors. >> >> Are you by any chance able to substantiate your statement? > >I made a short research on the commits of about the last four month (the >board decision has also only a three month period in mind). > >So lets have a look on the commits of the last four month of the fork >(without the localization work, copied from Weblate): > >* March 2022: > >- 4 volunteers, one of them was already for long time active in the >LibreOffice design team >- work done: two lines in a readme, some lines of JS, CSS and icons > > >* April 2022: > >- 4 volunteers, one of them is the long time active design team member, >another one is a current member of the board with an JS one liner >- work done: unify ui naming menubar js file, docker image build script, >CSS and the one line in a JS file > > >* May 2022: > >- 2 volunteers, one of them is the long time active design team member >- work done: CSS > > >* June 2022: > >- 2 volunteers, one of them is the long time active design team member >- work done: CSS and an icon > > >Noticeable: except the long time LibreOffice design contributor the >volunteers committed only a very few patches and were only in one month >active (without one of them, who submitted another patch in a second >month, a further icon). > > >> >>> It seemed there is a big interest to set high barriers in that area and >>> to block initiative. >> >> Even the number of voters in favour of that decision are fewer than >> those required to pass the barrier ;-) >Yep. >> >> As stated in my answer to the "decision", it just needs to be re-run >> with a text that would allow the community a chance to do something. >> >> Are you anyway continuing to prepare a version of LOOL that could be >> presented a candidate to start creating a community around it? >> >I'm working on that too, but that need some more time. I'm happy, if >someone wants to join me and create e.g. a docker build from the source. > > >>> >>> And what I've learned within the communication during the last week(s). >>> There is no open communication and part of the game is to lead you by >>> the nose. >> >> Could you elaborate on that? >> >> I'm not sure I fully grasp the meaning of the above sentences. > >The last part of this 'communication strategy' reached me in private on >July, 3rd at 7.29pm, when I was told that I should contribute objective >reason / points to the debate around LOOL and the decision about its >atticization for LibreOffice Online. And just some hours later on July, >4th, 3.11am the results of the decision were published on this list. >I had also the impression that I'm in a extra supervision here (and with >private emails). > >> >>> And as we are saying in Germany: Der Fisch stinkt vom Kopfe her. >> >> That's the same saying we use in Italy but it's not clear what you >> mean with it or to what/whom you are referring to. >> >Hope the above helped a bit. > >Regards, >Andreas The long arm of the supervisor reaches several of us who dared to support the proposal to reopen the repo. In my case, trying to point out what can be said and what cannot. -- 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] [DECISION] Delayed atticization for LibreOffice Online
Hi Paolo, all, although I have not too much spare time for a research I try to answer your questions. Am 06.07.22 um 22:46 schrieb Paolo Vecchi: > Hi Andreas, > > On 06/07/2022 20:08, Andreas Mantke wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> Am 04.07.22 um 03:11 schrieb Thorsten Behrens: >>> Dear community, >>> >>> the following vote happened after our Monday board call, on request as >>> a private email vote: >>> The board sees positive & constructive news around renewed developer interest in LibreOffice Online. To further encourage initiatives to collaborate on a single, TDF-hosted repository, the board resolves to postpone formally atticizing Online for three more months. Unless the de-atticization requirements [1] (3 different developers contributing non-trivially) are fulfilled by then, and/or if necessary binding corporate commitments are not made by 2022-10-01, Online will be automatically moved to the attic. [1] https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/TDF/Policies/Attic#Deatticization_requirements >> it is very interesting to read this criteria and compare it with the git >> log of COOL. It seemed even this Github repo (project) didn't attract >> the number of volunteers, which are requested in the decision proposal. > > It's odd you say that as IIRC Mr Meeks said that since they move the > project to Microsoft GitHub they had more contributors. > > Are you by any chance able to substantiate your statement? I made a short research on the commits of about the last four month (the board decision has also only a three month period in mind). So lets have a look on the commits of the last four month of the fork (without the localization work, copied from Weblate): * March 2022: - 4 volunteers, one of them was already for long time active in the LibreOffice design team - work done: two lines in a readme, some lines of JS, CSS and icons * April 2022: - 4 volunteers, one of them is the long time active design team member, another one is a current member of the board with an JS one liner - work done: unify ui naming menubar js file, docker image build script, CSS and the one line in a JS file * May 2022: - 2 volunteers, one of them is the long time active design team member - work done: CSS * June 2022: - 2 volunteers, one of them is the long time active design team member - work done: CSS and an icon Noticeable: except the long time LibreOffice design contributor the volunteers committed only a very few patches and were only in one month active (without one of them, who submitted another patch in a second month, a further icon). > >> It seemed there is a big interest to set high barriers in that area and >> to block initiative. > > Even the number of voters in favour of that decision are fewer than > those required to pass the barrier ;-) Yep. > > As stated in my answer to the "decision", it just needs to be re-run > with a text that would allow the community a chance to do something. > > Are you anyway continuing to prepare a version of LOOL that could be > presented a candidate to start creating a community around it? > I'm working on that too, but that need some more time. I'm happy, if someone wants to join me and create e.g. a docker build from the source. >> >> And what I've learned within the communication during the last week(s). >> There is no open communication and part of the game is to lead you by >> the nose. > > Could you elaborate on that? > > I'm not sure I fully grasp the meaning of the above sentences. The last part of this 'communication strategy' reached me in private on July, 3rd at 7.29pm, when I was told that I should contribute objective reason / points to the debate around LOOL and the decision about its atticization for LibreOffice Online. And just some hours later on July, 4th, 3.11am the results of the decision were published on this list. I had also the impression that I'm in a extra supervision here (and with private emails). > >> And as we are saying in Germany: Der Fisch stinkt vom Kopfe her. > > That's the same saying we use in Italy but it's not clear what you > mean with it or to what/whom you are referring to. > Hope the above helped a bit. Regards, Andreas -- ## Free Software Advocate ## Plone add-on developer ## My blog: http://www.amantke.de/blog -- 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] [DECISION] Delayed atticization for LibreOffice Online
Hi Andreas, On 06/07/2022 20:08, Andreas Mantke wrote: Hi all, Am 04.07.22 um 03:11 schrieb Thorsten Behrens: Dear community, the following vote happened after our Monday board call, on request as a private email vote: The board sees positive & constructive news around renewed developer interest in LibreOffice Online. To further encourage initiatives to collaborate on a single, TDF-hosted repository, the board resolves to postpone formally atticizing Online for three more months. Unless the de-atticization requirements [1] (3 different developers contributing non-trivially) are fulfilled by then, and/or if necessary binding corporate commitments are not made by 2022-10-01, Online will be automatically moved to the attic. [1] https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/TDF/Policies/Attic#Deatticization_requirements it is very interesting to read this criteria and compare it with the git log of COOL. It seemed even this Github repo (project) didn't attract the number of volunteers, which are requested in the decision proposal. It's odd you say that as IIRC Mr Meeks said that since they move the project to Microsoft GitHub they had more contributors. Are you by any chance able to substantiate your statement? It seemed there is a big interest to set high barriers in that area and to block initiative. Even the number of voters in favour of that decision are fewer than those required to pass the barrier ;-) As stated in my answer to the "decision", it just needs to be re-run with a text that would allow the community a chance to do something. Are you anyway continuing to prepare a version of LOOL that could be presented a candidate to start creating a community around it? And what I've learned within the communication during the last week(s). There is no open communication and part of the game is to lead you by the nose. Could you elaborate on that? I'm not sure I fully grasp the meaning of the above sentences. And as we are saying in Germany: Der Fisch stinkt vom Kopfe her. That's the same saying we use in Italy but it's not clear what you mean with it or to what/whom you are referring to. Regards, Andreas Ciao Paolo -- ## Free Software Advocate ## Plone add-on developer ## My blog: http://www.amantke.de/blog -- Paolo Vecchi - Member of the Board of Directors The Document Foundation, Kurfürstendamm 188, 10707 Berlin, DE Gemeinnützige rechtsfähige Stiftung des bürgerlichen Rechts Legal details: https://www.documentfoundation.org/imprint OpenPGP_signature Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [board-discuss] [DECISION] Delayed atticization for LibreOffice Online
Hi all, Am 04.07.22 um 03:11 schrieb Thorsten Behrens: > Dear community, > > the following vote happened after our Monday board call, on request as > a private email vote: > >> The board sees positive & constructive news around renewed >> developer interest in LibreOffice Online. To further encourage >> initiatives to collaborate on a single, TDF-hosted repository, the >> board resolves to postpone formally atticizing Online for three >> more months. Unless the de-atticization requirements [1] (3 >> different developers contributing non-trivially) are fulfilled by >> then, and/or if necessary binding corporate commitments are not >> made by 2022-10-01, Online will be automatically moved to the >> attic. >> >> [1] >> https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/TDF/Policies/Attic#Deatticization_requirements >> it is very interesting to read this criteria and compare it with the git log of COOL. It seemed even this Github repo (project) didn't attract the number of volunteers, which are requested in the decision proposal. It seemed there is a big interest to set high barriers in that area and to block initiative. And what I've learned within the communication during the last week(s). There is no open communication and part of the game is to lead you by the nose. And as we are saying in Germany: Der Fisch stinkt vom Kopfe her. Regards, Andreas -- ## Free Software Advocate ## Plone add-on developer ## My blog: http://www.amantke.de/blog -- 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] [DECISION] Delayed atticization for LibreOffice Online
El 04.07.2022 06:39, Paolo Vecchi escribió: Dear community, for the record my rejection of the proposal as formulated has not been counted. I repeatedly asked for various elements to be considered and to amend the text before being able to vote on it but that unfortunately hasn't happened. My opinion is that the text doesn't take in consideration feedback and other issues which include: - discussion period of 24h too short as it covers one working day where people are busy with their day job - vote started after less than 21h at 18:53 when people coming back from work could have had time to rush in a comment - comments made during the meeting and in the mailing lists were not considered for inclusion in an actual compromise text - attempts to have an evaluation of the concerns expressed in time met no considerations - some managed to provide their opinion only in the vote reply but still no corrective actions have been taken - IMHO the chairman, as director of a company reselling COOL[0], should have declared a potential CoI and let the vice-chairman deal with the evaluation and inclusions of comments to make sure the process is seen by all as fully impartial regardless of actual CoIs. I could have simply voted against and found ourselves once again in the same split situation we had in the original vote and that's what I wanted to avoid. The main issues and missing elements I see in this proposal are: - LOOL should not be automatically archived, a full evaluation of the situation after a fair period of time should be done - the time frame is too short for a community to form (holiday season making it even more difficult) so 12 months could be a fair period of time - reopening of the repository with due warnings until LOOL is safe to use and activities show a healthy community forming - marketing to promote the creation of a community around LOOL - get more feedback from the wider community at LibOCon about the future of LOOL - finishing evaluating with commercial stakeholders the mutually Without the above IMHO the proposal will lead only to one outcome. Having said the above I ask to reconsider the decision and add it to the public part of the agenda for the next board meeting. Ciao Paolo [0] https://blog.allotropia.de/2021/08/25/allotropia-and-collabora-announce-partnership/ Fully support Paolo hoping more voices raise their concerns too. -- 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] [DECISION] Delayed atticization for LibreOffice Online
Hi Paolo, Paolo Vecchi wrote on 04/07/2022 11:39: Dear community, for the record my rejection of the proposal as formulated has not been counted. You did not participate in the vote. Full stop. I repeatedly asked for various elements to be considered and to amend the text before being able to vote on it but that unfortunately hasn't happened. Indeed, you've spent a lot of time to reopen the debate on the decision that was taken in the board meeting (the extended public part) last Monday. There was discussion about your ideas and that did not lead to any change. My opinion is that the text doesn't take in consideration feedback and other issues which include: - discussion period of 24h too short as it covers one working day where people are busy with their day job It didn't appear to me that you had not enough time available to share your thoughts. - vote started after less than 21h at 18:53 when people coming back from work could have had time to rush in a comment 24 hours after the meeting maybe, But hé, who cares ;) - comments made during the meeting and in the mailing lists were not considered for inclusion in an actual compromise text We extensively discussed and a compromise was accepted in the meeting. - attempts to have an evaluation of the concerns expressed in time met no considerations I think all your more then 10 mails received replies. - some managed to provide their opinion only in the vote reply but still no corrective actions have been taken We extensively discussed and a compromise was accepted in the meeting. I have huge respect for the board members spending again time to discuss a decision already taken that you do not agree with. - IMHO the chairman, as director of a company reselling COOL[0], should have declared a potential CoI and let the vice-chairman deal with the evaluation and inclusions of comments to make sure the process is seen by all as fully impartial regardless of actual CoIs. Three remarks: 1. I hold strong (did mail this before) that this topic/vote is about having sane development projects under TDF umbrella. To prevent hosting zombi-projects, which will harm our reputation. It is not about allowing or blocking people to work on what they love. And it is not about a choice for TDF to publish a online version of LibreOffice. 2. It is without ground in our rules nor precedent that a potential CoI should exclude anyone from her/his role in our work. 3. Declaring people having a indirect CoI is becoming popular, it seems. It is clear from various examples, that the current CoI policy leads to lack of clarity and discussions. I think it makes sense to have a well prepared and organized discussion on this at LibOCon. I could have simply voted against and found ourselves once again in the same split situation we had in the original vote and that's what I wanted to avoid. You could have brought in that elegant thought on the board list ;) The main issues and missing elements I see in this proposal are: ... > Without the above IMHO the proposal will lead only to one outcome. I refer to my comment above: no one is blocking anyone on working on the code and project they love. If the conditions in the decisions are not met in three monts, the project will be atticizised. If conditions for de-atticizations are met in four months (and those are the same..) the repository will be de-atticizised. How beautiful and simple it that. You could consider to stop spending time from yourself and others on this useless debate and instead do some constructive work on what you want to see happen in the future? And - apart from what László explained earlier on this list about projects-dynamics - making sure that your place looks a fun one to be in, would probably be wise too. Having said the above I ask to reconsider the decision and add it to the public part of the agenda for the next board meeting. . Cheers, Cor -- Cor Nouws, member Board of Directors The Document Foundation, Kurfürstendamm 188, 10707 Berlin Gemeinnützige rechtsfähige Stiftung des bürgerlichen Rechts Legal details: http://www.documentfoundation.org/imprint GPD key ID: 0xB13480A6 - 591A 30A7 36A0 CE3C 3D28 A038 E49D 7365 B134 80A6 mobile : +31 (0)6 25 20 7001 skype : cornouws blog: cor4office-nl.blogspot.com jabber : cor4off...@jabber.org -- 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] [DECISION] Delayed atticization for LibreOffice Online
Dear community, for the record my rejection of the proposal as formulated has not been counted. I repeatedly asked for various elements to be considered and to amend the text before being able to vote on it but that unfortunately hasn't happened. My opinion is that the text doesn't take in consideration feedback and other issues which include: - discussion period of 24h too short as it covers one working day where people are busy with their day job - vote started after less than 21h at 18:53 when people coming back from work could have had time to rush in a comment - comments made during the meeting and in the mailing lists were not considered for inclusion in an actual compromise text - attempts to have an evaluation of the concerns expressed in time met no considerations - some managed to provide their opinion only in the vote reply but still no corrective actions have been taken - IMHO the chairman, as director of a company reselling COOL[0], should have declared a potential CoI and let the vice-chairman deal with the evaluation and inclusions of comments to make sure the process is seen by all as fully impartial regardless of actual CoIs. I could have simply voted against and found ourselves once again in the same split situation we had in the original vote and that's what I wanted to avoid. The main issues and missing elements I see in this proposal are: - LOOL should not be automatically archived, a full evaluation of the situation after a fair period of time should be done - the time frame is too short for a community to form (holiday season making it even more difficult) so 12 months could be a fair period of time - reopening of the repository with due warnings until LOOL is safe to use and activities show a healthy community forming - marketing to promote the creation of a community around LOOL - get more feedback from the wider community at LibOCon about the future of LOOL - finishing evaluating with commercial stakeholders the mutually Without the above IMHO the proposal will lead only to one outcome. Having said the above I ask to reconsider the decision and add it to the public part of the agenda for the next board meeting. Ciao Paolo [0] https://blog.allotropia.de/2021/08/25/allotropia-and-collabora-announce-partnership/ On 04/07/2022 03:11, Thorsten Behrens wrote: Dear community, the following vote happened after our Monday board call, on request as a private email vote: The board sees positive & constructive news around renewed developer interest in LibreOffice Online. To further encourage initiatives to collaborate on a single, TDF-hosted repository, the board resolves to postpone formally atticizing Online for three more months. Unless the de-atticization requirements [1] (3 different developers contributing non-trivially) are fulfilled by then, and/or if necessary binding corporate commitments are not made by 2022-10-01, Online will be automatically moved to the attic. [1] https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/TDF/Policies/Attic#Deatticization_requirements The Board of Directors at the time of voting consists of 7 seat holders (not including deputies). In order to be quorate, the vote needs to have 1/2 or more of the Board of Directors members, which gives 4. A total of 6 Board of Directors members have participated in the vote. The vote is quorate. Result of vote: 2 approvals, 3 abstain, 1 disapproval. **Decision: The proposal has been accepted.** Two deputies support the proposal. Participants to the vote were (in alphabetical order): Ayhan, Caolán, Cor, Emiliano, Gabriel, Kendy, László, Thorsten -- Thorsten -- Paolo Vecchi - Member of the Board of Directors The Document Foundation, Kurfürstendamm 188, 10707 Berlin, DE Gemeinnützige rechtsfähige Stiftung des bürgerlichen Rechts Legal details: https://www.documentfoundation.org/imprint OpenPGP_signature Description: OpenPGP digital signature
