[marketing-dev] Re: Why TDF should be the place for one united Community
We will protect past investments by building on the solid achievements of our first decade I can not help reading that line and thinking the fact is, the only way we all can protect past investments and build on them is to forge a way for both communities to come together! On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 1:44 AM, Sophie sgautier@free.fr wrote: Hi Khirano, On 26/05/2011 01:34, Kazunari Hirano wrote: Hi Florian, Did TDF change its mission, from the evolution of the OpenOffice.org Community[1] to the evolution of the LibreOffice Community[2]? [1] http://www.documentfoundation.org/foundation/ this is the foundation [...] [2] http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/LibreOffice-3-3-2-is-now-available-td2714419.html this is LibreOffice The Document Foundation is issued, born from the OpenOffice.org community with the clear say that we wanted a future for the product and the project. Flo said it very well in his first message, I won't repeat. We support our product LibreOffice also, and the foundation may develop other products and support other products too in the future. That doesn't mean that we forget where we come from, and this is why also we are here, trying to unify us again, under the TDF umbrella if possible. Building a foundation ask for a lot of work, energy, time. More and more people have confidence in us (soon, next month, the French ministries will announce their support), the foundation should also be their home for the work, the energy, the time and the money they invest. Kind regards Sophie -- - To unsubscribe send email to dev-unsubscr...@marketing.openoffice.org For additional commands send email to sy...@marketing.openoffice.org with Subject: help -- - To unsubscribe send email to dev-unsubscr...@marketing.openoffice.org For additional commands send email to sy...@marketing.openoffice.org with Subject: help
[marketing-dev] Re: Why TDF should be the place for one united Community
El 25/05/11 17:42, Sophie Gautier escribió: Alexandro, please, fact and realty, you understand that after all what has been written and said about the Spanish speaking community we can't trust you any more or only backup your says. We know that you are not representative of it and the we you are talking about is only a very very low group of people, that is not the Spanish speaking community at all. The same very low group that make translations, and make support in lists, and make the job in spanish sites of both projects... bad for you Sophie... Bad for you... Discuss the ideas but not people -- --- Prof. Román H. Gelbort No busquemos aplicaciones que reemplacen aplicaciones, sino aplicaciones que resuelvan problemas específicos... http://www.piensalibre.com.ar --- -- - To unsubscribe send email to dev-unsubscr...@marketing.openoffice.org For additional commands send email to sy...@marketing.openoffice.org with Subject: help
[marketing-dev] Re: Why TDF should be the place for one united Community
Hello, Le Thu, 26 May 2011 09:50:27 -0300, Roman H. Gelbort ro...@piensalibre.com.ar a écrit : El 25/05/11 17:42, Sophie Gautier escribió: Alexandro, please, fact and realty, you understand that after all what has been written and said about the Spanish speaking community we can't trust you any more or only backup your says. We know that you are not representative of it and the we you are talking about is only a very very low group of people, that is not the Spanish speaking community at all. The same very low group that make translations, and make support in lists, and make the job in spanish sites of both projects... bad for you Sophie... Bad for you... Discuss the ideas but not people Actually the group in question has stopped contributing to the LibreOffice project in any significant way I believe. But it's perhaps not very important at that stage. Let's perhaps refocus the discussion on one question that might perhaps all that matters now: are there any significant differences between the two projects that would make a cooperation -or broadly speaking, an unification- hard or impossible? If I may suggest, let's start with anything (if there's anything) that is broad or critical enough to discuss first. Best, -- Charles-H. Schulz Membre du Comité exécutif The Document Foundation. -- - To unsubscribe send email to dev-unsubscr...@marketing.openoffice.org For additional commands send email to sy...@marketing.openoffice.org with Subject: help
[marketing-dev] Re: Why TDF should be the place for one united Community
El 26/05/11 13:09, Charles-H. Schulz escribió: But it's perhaps not very important at that stage. +1 I'm sorry by mistake the focus. Is better build the new idea for OOo comunity. :-) -- --- Prof. Román H. Gelbort No busquemos aplicaciones que reemplacen aplicaciones, sino aplicaciones que resuelvan problemas específicos... http://www.piensalibre.com.ar --- -- - To unsubscribe send email to dev-unsubscr...@marketing.openoffice.org For additional commands send email to sy...@marketing.openoffice.org with Subject: help
[marketing-dev] Re: Why TDF should be the place for one united Community
On 26 May 2011 15:18, Roman H. Gelbort ro...@piensalibre.com.ar wrote: El 26/05/11 13:09, Charles-H. Schulz escribió: But it's perhaps not very important at that stage. +1 I'm sorry by mistake the focus. Is better build the new idea for OOo comunity. :-) How about gaining agreement on governance. That is really the most significant issue since if it can be agreed most other things will fall into place. -- Ian Ofqual Accredited IT Qualifications The Schools ITQ www.theINGOTs.org +44 (0)1827 305940 You have received this email from the following company: The Learning Machine Limited, Reg Office, 36 Ashby Road, Tamworth, Staffordshire, B79 8AQ. Reg No: 05560797, Registered in England and Wales. -- - To unsubscribe send email to dev-unsubscr...@marketing.openoffice.org For additional commands send email to sy...@marketing.openoffice.org with Subject: help
[marketing-dev] Re: Why TDF should be the place for one united Community
Le Thu, 26 May 2011 11:18:48 -0300, Roman H. Gelbort ro...@piensalibre.com.ar a écrit : El 26/05/11 13:09, Charles-H. Schulz escribió: But it's perhaps not very important at that stage. +1 I'm sorry by mistake the focus. Is better build the new idea for OOo comunity. :-) That wasn't the focus I was suggesting and I would very much like to get input on the question I have asked. Thanks, -- Charles-H. Schulz Membre du Comité exécutif The Document Foundation. -- - To unsubscribe send email to dev-unsubscr...@marketing.openoffice.org For additional commands send email to sy...@marketing.openoffice.org with Subject: help
[marketing-dev] Re: Why TDF should be the place for one united Community
Hello Ian, Le Thu, 26 May 2011 15:32:22 +0100, Ian Lynch ianrly...@gmail.com a écrit : On 26 May 2011 15:18, Roman H. Gelbort ro...@piensalibre.com.ar wrote: El 26/05/11 13:09, Charles-H. Schulz escribió: But it's perhaps not very important at that stage. +1 I'm sorry by mistake the focus. Is better build the new idea for OOo comunity. :-) How about gaining agreement on governance. That is really the most significant issue since if it can be agreed most other things will fall into place. That does make sense, but what do you specifically mean by an agreement on governance? -- Charles-H. Schulz Membre du Comité exécutif The Document Foundation. -- - To unsubscribe send email to dev-unsubscr...@marketing.openoffice.org For additional commands send email to sy...@marketing.openoffice.org with Subject: help
[marketing-dev] Re: Why TDF should be the place for one united Community
On 26 May 2011 17:39, Charles-H. Schulz charles.sch...@documentfoundation.org wrote: Hello Ian, Le Thu, 26 May 2011 15:32:22 +0100, Ian Lynch ianrly...@gmail.com a écrit : On 26 May 2011 15:18, Roman H. Gelbort ro...@piensalibre.com.ar wrote: El 26/05/11 13:09, Charles-H. Schulz escribió: But it's perhaps not very important at that stage. +1 I'm sorry by mistake the focus. Is better build the new idea for OOo comunity. :-) How about gaining agreement on governance. That is really the most significant issue since if it can be agreed most other things will fall into place. That does make sense, but what do you specifically mean by an agreement on governance? If OOo and LO are to come together under one set of governance, the constitution/rules will have to be agreed. Here are some examples NOT specific suggestions, simply to illustrate the point. 1. TDF governance is adopted by all - in that case OOo community Council etc is absorbed into TDF 2. OOo CC is adopted by all - in that case TDF is absorbed into OOo CC 3. A new organisation is created with a new constitution and governance for both communities 4. Either governance is modified in some way to take account of the other 5. Each remains separate but agrees to cooperate in a sort of coalition. Once community and project governance is resolved the duly elected officers in consultation with the community can make decisions about eg development priorities use of names etc. I think until there is agreement on governance with delegated power to the governing body, there will always be the potential for acrimonious disagreement about every individual issue. -- Charles-H. Schulz Membre du Comité exécutif The Document Foundation. -- - To unsubscribe send email to dev-unsubscr...@marketing.openoffice.org For additional commands send email to sy...@marketing.openoffice.org with Subject: help -- Ian Ofqual Accredited IT Qualifications The Schools ITQ www.theINGOTs.org +44 (0)1827 305940 You have received this email from the following company: The Learning Machine Limited, Reg Office, 36 Ashby Road, Tamworth, Staffordshire, B79 8AQ. Reg No: 05560797, Registered in England and Wales. -- - To unsubscribe send email to dev-unsubscr...@marketing.openoffice.org For additional commands send email to sy...@marketing.openoffice.org with Subject: help
[marketing-dev] Re: Why TDF should be the place for one united Community
Ian Lynch wrote (26-05-11 16:52) 1. TDF governance is adopted by all - in that case OOo community Council etc is absorbed into TDF 2. OOo CC is adopted by all - in that case TDF is absorbed into OOo CC 3. A new organisation is created with a new constitution and governance for both communities 4. Either governance is modified in some way to take account of the other 5. Each remains separate but agrees to cooperate in a sort of coalition. From a practical point of view, looking at what The Document Foundation is and offers; and since nearly all people in both projects know each other (often for a longer time): the number 1, in a sort of combination with 4, looks most feasible, offering best changes for result and continuity. Such an approach is in line with the suggestions I've read here several times the last week: what would people from the OOo project would like to add and/or change in TDF to make it feel the proper place for their ideas and wishes as well. Best, Cor -- - http://nl.libreoffice.org - giving openoffice.org its foundation :: The Document Foundation - -- - To unsubscribe send email to dev-unsubscr...@marketing.openoffice.org For additional commands send email to sy...@marketing.openoffice.org with Subject: help
[marketing-dev] Re: Why TDF should be the place for one united Community
Le Thu, 26 May 2011 15:52:35 +0100, Ian Lynch ianrly...@gmail.com a écrit : On 26 May 2011 17:39, Charles-H. Schulz charles.sch...@documentfoundation.org wrote: Hello Ian, Le Thu, 26 May 2011 15:32:22 +0100, Ian Lynch ianrly...@gmail.com a écrit : On 26 May 2011 15:18, Roman H. Gelbort ro...@piensalibre.com.ar wrote: El 26/05/11 13:09, Charles-H. Schulz escribió: But it's perhaps not very important at that stage. +1 I'm sorry by mistake the focus. Is better build the new idea for OOo comunity. :-) How about gaining agreement on governance. That is really the most significant issue since if it can be agreed most other things will fall into place. That does make sense, but what do you specifically mean by an agreement on governance? If OOo and LO are to come together under one set of governance, the constitution/rules will have to be agreed. Here are some examples NOT specific suggestions, simply to illustrate the point. 1. TDF governance is adopted by all - in that case OOo community Council etc is absorbed into TDF 2. OOo CC is adopted by all - in that case TDF is absorbed into OOo CC 3. A new organisation is created with a new constitution and governance for both communities 4. Either governance is modified in some way to take account of the other 5. Each remains separate but agrees to cooperate in a sort of coalition. Once community and project governance is resolved the duly elected officers in consultation with the community can make decisions about eg development priorities use of names etc. I think until there is agreement on governance with delegated power to the governing body, there will always be the potential for acrimonious disagreement about every individual issue. I must say you got me confused here. :-) So let me try to address your 5 points, I understand you may be thinking about some more, but anyway that would be food for thought. Also, this is my opinion only, not the one of TDF. 5: this is in fact very feasible. The minimum being: we use ODF, stupid! but tighter cooperation is always good to work on. However the 5 can only work or even be possible if some development force still exists. Which means that the Hamburg engineers would continue to get paid for their work. 4. that would depend what you mean by modified in some way. We would much rather aggregate more contributors from OOo rather than modifying our governance to have one specific OOo representative who is not elected and only nominated by some strange authority. But we do have an Advisory Board, maybe we could work something out there. 3. frankly that would be a waste of time. Sorry to put it bluntly, but the way I always saw us (all of us, here) as one community and two projects. Basically, most of the community went away to create another new project because the first one was plagued by too many issues and uncertainty of the future. Now the former project is in peril, his resources are not being ensured by its sponsor... We created new structure, new processes (sometimes we kept the old ones), precisely to fix the project, while working as one community. 2. :-) 1. I actually have some questions about this one. You're alluding to a simple integration of OOo into TDF. That is very much what already happened, but there are still engineers here (who don't code anymore, I think) and a few people who sticked to OOo (no criticism from my side here). In this case we could think about ways to alleviate concerns from the OOo community but also to communicate about what we could then call unification. So to answer to your argument that we need to sort out governance first and then issues will be handled in due time I think I'm not so much in agreement with you, because I think the OOo project has come to a point where there are various diverging interests on the inside; I would even call them existential interests: there is a very skilled developers' workforce on one hand who might soon be looking for a job, on the other, there are several teams here and there, but mostly users. If you take a look at the size of the LibreOffice project (that's not meant for me to brag) I would actually say that it's got its own momentum now, while this project here is disagregating in its structure (but perhaps not in its ideas). Mixing the two governance would also be not supported by the LibreOffice folks. On the other hand, having some sort of representativity inside, say, TDF's Advisory Board might be a very good thing. So a mixture of 1 +4 +5 could be a good way forward, while not emphasizing too much on governance. best, Charles. -- Charles-H. Schulz Membre du Comité exécutif The Document Foundation. -- - To unsubscribe send email to dev-unsubscr...@marketing.openoffice.org For additional commands send email to sy...@marketing.openoffice.org with
[marketing-dev] Re: Why TDF should be the place for one united Community
1. TDF governance is adopted by all - in that case OOo community Council etc is absorbed into TDF 2. OOo CC is adopted by all - in that case TDF is absorbed into OOo CC 3. A new organisation is created with a new constitution and governance for both communities 4. Either governance is modified in some way to take account of the other 5. Each remains separate but agrees to cooperate in a sort of coalition. Once community and project governance is resolved the duly elected officers in consultation with the community can make decisions about eg development priorities use of names etc. I think until there is agreement on governance with delegated power to the governing body, there will always be the potential for acrimonious disagreement about every individual issue. I must say you got me confused here. :-) So let me try to address your 5 points, I understand you may be thinking about some more, but anyway that would be food for thought. Also, this is my opinion only, not the one of TDF. 5: this is in fact very feasible. The minimum being: we use ODF, stupid! but tighter cooperation is always good to work on. However the 5 can only work or even be possible if some development force still exists. Which means that the Hamburg engineers would continue to get paid for their work. 4. that would depend what you mean by modified in some way. We would much rather aggregate more contributors from OOo rather than modifying our governance to have one specific OOo representative who is not elected and only nominated by some strange authority. But we do have an Advisory Board, maybe we could work something out there. 3. frankly that would be a waste of time. Sorry to put it bluntly, but the way I always saw us (all of us, here) as one community and two projects. Basically, most of the community went away to create another new project because the first one was plagued by too many issues and uncertainty of the future. Now the former project is in peril, his resources are not being ensured by its sponsor... We created new structure, new processes (sometimes we kept the old ones), precisely to fix the project, while working as one community. 2. :-) 1. I actually have some questions about this one. You're alluding to a simple integration of OOo into TDF. That is very much what already happened, but there are still engineers here (who don't code anymore, I think) and a few people who sticked to OOo (no criticism from my side here). In this case we could think about ways to alleviate concerns from the OOo community but also to communicate about what we could then call unification. So to answer to your argument that we need to sort out governance first and then issues will be handled in due time I think I'm not so much in agreement with you, because I think the OOo project has come to a point where there are various diverging interests on the inside; I would even call them existential interests: there is a very skilled developers' workforce on one hand who might soon be looking for a job, on the other, there are several teams here and there, but mostly users. If you take a look at the size of the LibreOffice project (that's not meant for me to brag) I would actually say that it's got its own momentum now, while this project here is disagregating in its structure (but perhaps not in its ideas). Mixing the two governance would also be not supported by the LibreOffice folks. On the other hand, having some sort of representativity inside, say, TDF's Advisory Board might be a very good thing. So a mixture of 1 +4 +5 could be a good way forward, while not emphasizing too much on governance. I was careful to say in the original post that these were illustrative examples, not specific suggestions or recommendations. There are probably other possibilities too. Your reply is exactly why agreement (or disagreement) on governance is required. Without it there will be constant uncertainty and a lot of wasted energy and that is one thing neither group can really afford. btw, I'm speaking here as a neutral. I'm not trying to persuade anyone of any specific governance - the examples I produced were deliberately balanced in that respect. best, Charles. -- Charles-H. Schulz Membre du Comité exécutif The Document Foundation. -- - To unsubscribe send email to dev-unsubscr...@marketing.openoffice.org For additional commands send email to sy...@marketing.openoffice.org with Subject: help -- Charles-H. Schulz Membre du Comité exécutif The Document Foundation. -- - To unsubscribe send email to dev-unsubscr...@marketing.openoffice.org For additional commands send email to sy...@marketing.openoffice.org with Subject: help -- Ian Ofqual Accredited IT Qualifications The Schools
[marketing-dev] Re: Why TDF should be the place for one united Community
Hi Roman, Alexandro, * you may say you're the only people involved in OOo from the Spanish Community, but you know perfectly that's not true. Sophie is right, you don't represent the Spanish Community at all. But here's not the place for such a discussion. Best Greetings, Ramon Roman H. Gelbort wrote: El 25/05/11 17:42, Sophie Gautier escribió: Alexandro, please, fact and realty, you understand that after all what has been written and said about the Spanish speaking community we can't trust you any more or only backup your says. We know that you are not representative of it and the we you are talking about is only a very very low group of people, that is not the Spanish speaking community at all. The same very low group that make translations, and make support in lists, and make the job in spanish sites of both projects... bad for you Sophie... Bad for you... Discuss the ideas but not people -- - To unsubscribe send email to dev-unsubscr...@marketing.openoffice.org For additional commands send email to sy...@marketing.openoffice.org with Subject: help
[marketing-dev] Fwd: Re: Re: Why TDF should be the place for one united Community
Resent with the right address, sorry again for the moderators of the list. Original Message Subject: Re: [marketing-dev] Re: Why TDF should be the place for one united Community Date: Fri, 27 May 2011 08:35:50 +0300 From: Sophie Gautier gautier.sop...@gmail.com To: dev@marketing.openoffice.org Hi Khirano, On 27/05/2011 01:50, Kazunari Hirano wrote: Hi Sophie, Thanks for your explanation. So TDF didn't change its mission but it added the LIbreOffice Community to its mission. http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/JA/Main_Page The Document Foundation is the community, whatever the product. LibreOffice is the product currently developed by the foundation but that could be xyz products owned or hosted by the Foundation. So there is nothing to change in the wording, the roots are still the OpenOffice.org project, the product TDF currently is LibreOffice. See it as the Mozilla Foundation if you want, you belong to the Mozilla Foundation whatever you work on Firefox, Drumbeat, SUMO, etc, it's only one community. Kind regards Sophie -- - To unsubscribe send email to dev-unsubscr...@marketing.openoffice.org For additional commands send email to sy...@marketing.openoffice.org with Subject: help
