subject:"\[tdf\-discuss\] A how to"

Hi,

Am 10.01.2011 00:51, schrieb Sigrid Carrera:

 Reason for not using those forums was that there are already a few
 (good!) fora out there and we don't want to fight against them. In
 contrast, I think, it was planned to link to those forums from our
 website.

Yes. This has been disussed and explained at length.

We do not want to devide the knowledge and experience, that is
contained in the few well-proven forums, that have been existing for
years. We´d better point to these, rather than establishing yet
another forum.

That´s why I even advocate closing down http://libreofficeforum.org/

However, there is lots of discussion about creating yet another
forum. And I fear lots of energy is being put into this. Kind of
makes me desperate.

Stefan




-- 
LibreOffice - Die Freiheit nehm' ich mir!

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] [Forum]How will the forum be organized?

2011-01-10 Thread David Nelson

Hi Stefan, * :-)

On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 18:21, Stefan Weigel
stefan.wei...@bildungskreis.org wrote:
 However, there is lots of discussion about creating yet another
 forum. And I fear lots of energy is being put into this. Kind of
 makes me desperate.

But given that Nabble is simply an interface onto our own mailing
lists, can I assume you don't have anything against a Nabble
integration into the libreoffice.org website, under Get Help?

(Can possibly be configured for read-only access, or can allow sending
to lists after login.)

David Nelson

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] [Forum]How will the forum be organized?

Hi David,

Am 10.01.2011 11:29, schrieb David Nelson:

 On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 18:21, Stefan Weigel
 stefan.wei...@bildungskreis.org wrote:
 However, there is lots of discussion about creating yet another
 forum. And I fear lots of energy is being put into this. Kind of
 makes me desperate.
 
 But given that Nabble is simply an interface onto our own mailing
 lists, can I assume you don't have anything against a Nabble
 integration into the libreoffice.org website, under Get Help?

Yes, I tend to agree.

However, I haven´t had a closer look at Nabble. And I am asking
myself if it could be a source of confusion for unexperienced users,
who don´t even know, what a mailing list is, if Nabble looks and
behaves almost like a forum, but actually is an interface to mailing
lists. I don´t know, if this could turn out as an issue.

Stefan


-- 
LibreOffice - Die Freiheit nehm' ich mir!

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] [Forum]How will the forum be organized?

2011-01-10 Thread David Nelson

Hi Stefan, :-)

On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 18:42, Stefan Weigel
stefan.wei...@bildungskreis.org wrote:
 However, I haven´t had a closer look at Nabble. And I am asking
 myself if it could be a source of confusion for unexperienced users,
 who don´t even know, what a mailing list is, if Nabble looks and
 behaves almost like a forum, but actually is an interface to mailing
 lists. I don´t know, if this could turn out as an issue.

Well, the solution can be to just configure it as read-only interface,
for the moment... Plus there can be an explanation on the site about
what Nabble actually is and what it provides.

David Nelson

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] [Forum]How will the forum be organized?

Hi David,

Am 10.01.2011 11:53, schrieb David Nelson:

 On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 18:42, Stefan Weigel
 stefan.wei...@bildungskreis.org wrote:
 However, I haven´t had a closer look at Nabble. And I am asking
 myself if it could be a source of confusion for unexperienced users,
 who don´t even know, what a mailing list is, if Nabble looks and
 behaves almost like a forum, but actually is an interface to mailing
 lists. I don´t know, if this could turn out as an issue.
 
 Well, the solution can be to just configure it as read-only interface,
 for the moment... Plus there can be an explanation on the site about
 what Nabble actually is and what it provides.

Sounds good to me. ;-)

Actually that´s nothing very different to the links to ML-archives
we usually provide, but possibly a more user friendly interface.

Stefan

-- 
LibreOffice - Die Freiheit nehm' ich mir!

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] [Forum]How will the forum be organized?

On Mon, 2011-01-10 at 11:21 +0100, Stefan Weigel wrote:
 That´s why I even advocate closing down http://libreofficeforum.org/

I could not disagree more strongly. He had every right to open that
site, I don't like it, to say you can arbitrarily shut it down because
it does not fit with your likings is the type of action that I am here
to work against.

Thanks




-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] [Forum]How will the forum be organized?

On Mon, 2011-01-10 at 12:31 +0100, Stefan Weigel wrote:
 Hi David,
 
 Am 10.01.2011 11:53, schrieb David Nelson:
 
  On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 18:42, Stefan Weigel
  stefan.wei...@bildungskreis.org wrote:
  However, I haven´t had a closer look at Nabble. And I am asking
  myself if it could be a source of confusion for unexperienced users,
  who don´t even know, what a mailing list is, if Nabble looks and
  behaves almost like a forum, but actually is an interface to mailing
  lists. I don´t know, if this could turn out as an issue.
  
  Well, the solution can be to just configure it as read-only interface,
  for the moment... Plus there can be an explanation on the site about
  what Nabble actually is and what it provides.
 
 Sounds good to me. ;-)

Hi Stefan,

It doesn't sound good to me. 

Thanks

Drew


-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] [Forum]How will the forum be organized?

Hi Drew,

Am 10.01.2011 15:09, schrieb drew:
 On Mon, 2011-01-10 at 11:21 +0100, Stefan Weigel wrote:
 That´s why I even advocate closing down http://libreofficeforum.org/
 
 I could not disagree more strongly. He had every right to open that
 site, I don't like it, to say you can arbitrarily shut it down because
 it does not fit with your likings is the type of action that I am here
 to work against.

Please don´t get me wrong! (which could happen, if you quote my
statement without its rationale!)

Of course anybody has the right to establish a forum for whatever
she/he likes.

But it is my personal conviction, that opening
http://libreofficeforum.org/ as yet another forum, although there
were already well-established forums, is no benefit for the project
or community. There were discussions about this in October last
year, as well as there have been discussions about this today.
There´s quite a lot of community members, who basically say the
same: There is no need for more and more forums in parallel.

What would you say, if people came up with multiple LibreOffice
websites in parallel? What would you say, if people came up with
multiple LibreOffice mailing lists in parallel? You have every right
to open a website or mailing list about LibreOffice besides the
existing one. But does it make sense? Is it good for the project and
the community, after all?

The same is for forums.

Stefan.


-- 
LibreOffice - Die Freiheit nehm' ich mir!

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] [Forum]How will the forum be organized?

On Mon, 2011-01-10 at 16:33 +0100, Stefan Weigel wrote:
 Hi Drew,
 
 Am 10.01.2011 15:09, schrieb drew:
  On Mon, 2011-01-10 at 11:21 +0100, Stefan Weigel wrote:
  That´s why I even advocate closing down http://libreofficeforum.org/
  
  I could not disagree more strongly. He had every right to open that
  site, I don't like it, to say you can arbitrarily shut it down because
  it does not fit with your likings is the type of action that I am here
  to work against.
 
 Please don´t get me wrong! (which could happen, if you quote my
 statement without its rationale!)
 
 Of course anybody has the right to establish a forum for whatever
 she/he likes.

I am glad you agree with me that the owner of libreofficeforum.org had
the right to open such a site.

 
 But it is my personal conviction, that opening
 http://libreofficeforum.org/ as yet another forum, although there
 were already well-established forums, is no benefit for the project
 or community. There were discussions about this in October last
 year, as well as there have been discussions about this today.
 There´s quite a lot of community members, who basically say the
 same: There is no need for more and more forums in parallel.
 
 What would you say, if people came up with multiple LibreOffice
 websites in parallel? What would you say, if people came up with
 multiple LibreOffice mailing lists in parallel? You have every right
 to open a website or mailing list about LibreOffice besides the
 existing one. But does it make sense? Is it good for the project and
 the community, after all?
 
 The same is for forums.

No you are mixing apples and oranges when comparing the two types of
sites, IMO.

But even if that where not true, there is this: LibreOffice not
OpenOffice. 

The application is not the same, and the organization is not the same.

What part of that do you disagree with, please.

Thanks

Drew





-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] [Forum]How will the forum be organized?

2011-01-10 Thread Fabián Rodríguez

On 11-01-10 10:33 AM, Stefan Weigel wrote:
 [...]
 What would you say, if people came up with multiple LibreOffice
 websites in parallel? What would you say, if people came up with
 multiple LibreOffice mailing lists in parallel? You have every right
 to open a website or mailing list about LibreOffice besides the
 existing one. But does it make sense? Is it good for the project and
 the community, after all?

 The same is for forums.
I would say there is branding confusion and I would ask why common
forums when the project, organization and product are different ? . It
makes a lot of sense to see such resources, more than the older forums
and the current mailing lists. I can't ask any normal user to come
anywhere close to mailing lists or Nabble, nevermind thousands of older
forum posts with seemingly unrelated information about the office suite
I am advocating to move away from. But that's only me and my limited
audience. Different audiences, but common name  brand only make sense.

I would also say it's *great* that other people are interested in
putting time into this and help them, perhaps make them official ASAP
and focus on other stuff :) This requires minimal due dilligence. Of
course I am pushing for another help channel (
http://libreoffice.shapado.com ), so I can't be very objective. Once
again, diverse audiences, more exposure.

Can't wait 'til the Facebook groups start popping up in every country
and language :)

Cheers,

Fabian

--
LibreOffice questions ? Des questions sur LibreOffice ? Preguntas acerca
de LibreOffice ? Ask LibreOffice: http://libreoffice.shapado.com/
~
Fabián Rodríguez
http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/User:MagicFab


-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] [Forum]How will the forum be organized?

On Mon, 2011-01-10 at 17:12 +0100, Stefan Weigel wrote:
 Hi Drew,
 
 Am 10.01.2011 16:50, schrieb drew:
 
  But even if that where not true, there is this: LibreOffice not
  OpenOffice.
  
  The application is not the same, and the organization is not the same.
  
  What part of that do you disagree with, please.
 
 The forums and other support sites (and the people running them)
 that were running under the label of OpenOffice.org until
 LibreOffice was born, were supporting all derivates of
 OpenOffice.org and they still do. And since LibreOffice came up,
 they do support LibreOffice as well. So, in this sence, there is no
 difference between LibreOffice and OpenOffice.org.
 
 If some user needs to know how to use DataPilot or how to use
 Templates or how to import data via Base, there is no difference or
 no noteworthy difference between LibreOffice and OpenOffice.org.
 
 That´s why I beleive it does not make sense to have well-established
 forums that cover all derivates of OpenOffice.org including
 LibreOffice and yet additional forums dedicated to LibreOffice.
 
 Stefan

Ok, that is good.

Well, in the particular of the moment you are correct that most of the
application is the same.

- but I do not want to be tied to OpenOffice.org in any way

- the ability to support OpenOffice.org users at our support site will
be possible also

- the time to begin building our knowledgebase is now, while it is still
possible to easily enhance it through the availability of the older
forums.

- the existence of multiple support options IMO is a positive for end
users, not a negative and causes no burden to our project. 

Slightly off topic but it is part of this issue: As to the question of a
single monolithic view of the project, all things LibreOffice will be at
one domain, this is a basic assumption that I an not willing to adhere
to.

There is great value in a networked view, I am not advocating a lack of
concern for the trademark, that will be from time to time necessary and
is part of our responsibilities, but I am most vigorously arguing
against a view that all things should flow into a single point, rather
that we build an organization that flows outwards, we support the
efforts and initiatives of others that make use of this Free Open Source
application we build.

Thanks

Drew


-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] [Forum]How will the forum be organized?

2011-01-10 Thread sophie


Hi Drew,
On 10/01/2011 19:41, drew wrote:
[...]


Slightly off topic but it is part of this issue: As to the question of a
single monolithic view of the project, all things LibreOffice will be at
one domain, this is a basic assumption that I an not willing to adhere
to.

There is great value in a networked view, I am not advocating a lack of
concern for the trademark, that will be from time to time necessary and
is part of our responsibilities, but I am most vigorously arguing
against a view that all things should flow into a single point, rather
that we build an organization that flows outwards, we support the
efforts and initiatives of others that make use of this Free Open Source
application we build.
I think there is a different view also coming from the native language 
groups because I think of the lack of 'marketing the community' we have 
met in the past.
The forum is a great support and resource for users, but we also have to 
think on how to get new members contributing to the project.
From our experience in the FR community,  but I think it's also true 
for other languages, the forum didn't help us here. I'm not accusing 
anybody, be sure it's absolutely not my idea, I just point that we need 
to think about it and find solutions. We should be able to have more 
contributors also coming from the forum.
I don't know how, because I can't participate to forum, but I think it 
participates to the idea of splitting the resources Stefan was talking 
about.  And it is may be more visible in language communities because we 
need resources for QA/Doc/L10n, etc, where it is done by the overall 
community en English language.
Again, this is not to open flames against the forum, it is just to state 
an issue we have met for some times now and open a reflexion on the way 
to solve it in our project.


Kind regards
Sophie


--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] [Forum]How will the forum be organized?

2011-01-10 Thread Karl-Heinz Gödderz

Hi,
Stefan Weigel schrieb:
 Hi,

 Am 10.01.2011 00:51, schrieb Sigrid Carrera:

   
 Reason for not using those forums was that there are already a few
 (good!) fora out there and we don't want to fight against them. In
 contrast, I think, it was planned to link to those forums from our
 website.
 
 That´s why I even advocate closing down http://libreofficeforum.org/

 However, there is lots of discussion about creating yet another
 forum. And I fear lots of energy is being put into this. Kind of
 makes me desperate.

 Stefan
Just a question:

Are they LibO-fora? OOo-fora? or mixed fora?

is there any other forum only for LibO ?

my 2 cent
Karl-Heinz

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] [Forum]How will the forum be organized?

On Mon, 2011-01-10 at 19:56 +0300, sophie wrote:
 Hi Drew,
 On 10/01/2011 19:41, drew wrote:
 [...]
 
  Slightly off topic but it is part of this issue: As to the question of a
  single monolithic view of the project, all things LibreOffice will be at
  one domain, this is a basic assumption that I an not willing to adhere
  to.
 
  There is great value in a networked view, I am not advocating a lack of
  concern for the trademark, that will be from time to time necessary and
  is part of our responsibilities, but I am most vigorously arguing
  against a view that all things should flow into a single point, rather
  that we build an organization that flows outwards, we support the
  efforts and initiatives of others that make use of this Free Open Source
  application we build.
 I think there is a different view also coming from the native language 
 groups because I think of the lack of 'marketing the community' we have 
 met in the past.
 The forum is a great support and resource for users, but we also have to 
 think on how to get new members contributing to the project.
  From our experience in the FR community,  but I think it's also true 
 for other languages, the forum didn't help us here. 

Hi Sophie,

Just looking at one issues here (in this email):

1) There is the very real need to keep a steady influx of new blood into
the project - this in the end is our capital. Here the only real way I
see to address that from the perspective of a web forum is to host an
official forum, in this setting there are mechanisms which can be built
to aid in nurturing new contributors, but also in leveraging the
knowledgebase that will form, for delivery to other users looking for
support. 

2) In an environment of multiple sites being run by multiple groups or
individuals it is still possible to leverage both the knowledge and the
resources using current web technologies.

I agree that there was not enough effort in the past on this within the
OO.o web forums, mostly though I feel that was a due to the fact that in
the beginning and for whatever reason the main project would not support
an official site and so ONLY third party sites sprang up, any way that
is how I perceived it. If that is the pattern again then again I don't
see how we will be able to address this particular need - or at best it
will be much more difficult.

Thanks

Drew




-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] [Forum]How will the forum be organized?

2011-01-10 Thread Michael Wheatland

On 11/01/2011 2:12 AM, drew d...@baseanswers.com wrote:

 On Mon, 2011-01-10 at 17:12 +0100, Stefan Weigel wrote:
  Hi Drew,
 
  Am 10.01.2011 16:50, schrieb drew:
 
   But even if that where not true, there is this: LibreOffice not
   OpenOffice.
  
   The application is not the same, and the organization is not the same.
  
   What part of that do you disagree with, please.
 
  The forums and other support sites (and the people running them)
  that were running under the label of OpenOffice.org until
  LibreOffice was born, were supporting all derivates of
  OpenOffice.org and they still do. And since LibreOffice came up,
  they do support LibreOffice as well. So, in this sence, there is no
  difference between LibreOffice and OpenOffice.org.
 
  If some user needs to know how to use DataPilot or how to use
  Templates or how to import data via Base, there is no difference or
  no noteworthy difference between LibreOffice and OpenOffice.org.
 
  That´s why I beleive it does not make sense to have well-established
  forums that cover all derivates of OpenOffice.org including
  LibreOffice and yet additional forums dedicated to LibreOffice.
 
  Stefan

 Ok, that is good.

 Well, in the particular of the moment you are correct that most of the
 application is the same.

 - but I do not want to be tied to OpenOffice.org in any way

 - the ability to support OpenOffice.org users at our support site will
 be possible also

 - the time to begin building our knowledgebase is now, while it is still
 possible to easily enhance it through the availability of the older
 forums.

 - the existence of multiple support options IMO is a positive for end
 users, not a negative and causes no burden to our project.

 Slightly off topic but it is part of this issue: As to the question of a
 single monolithic view of the project, all things LibreOffice will be at
 one domain, this is a basic assumption that I an not willing to adhere
 to.

 There is great value in a networked view, I am not advocating a lack of
 concern for the trademark, that will be from time to time necessary and
 is part of our responsibilities, but I am most vigorously arguing
 against a view that all things should flow into a single point, rather
 that we build an organization that flows outwards, we support the
 efforts and initiatives of others that make use of this Free Open Source
 application we build.

 Thanks

 Drew

I totally agree with your views Drew.

Some sites are changing to suit our new product, for example OOoAuthors is
changing branding and domain to avoid OOo branding and the mix up this
causes with our community. I think we should support them officially if they
wish to accommodate our community. However you are spot on, LibreOffice is a
new community with a new product. We need to build brand recognition by not
confusing end users by pointing them to OOo branded infrastructure.

I also share the passion for freedom that you advocate with external sites.
Although I think there is justification for community oversight on an
officially sanctioned forum.

Nabble is not a forum, does not provide the functionality of a forum, and is
likely to confuse end users who just want to ask a simple question on a
forum.

Also, I think it was suggested that I would set up something, this is not
the case, I have my hands full at the moment, someone else would have to
pick this up, but I would support the creation of a dedicated forum system
fully.

Michael Wheatland

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] [Forum]How will the forum be organized?

2011-01-10 Thread Andy Brown


On Mon Jan 10 2011 09:15:53 GMT-0800 (PST)  Karl-Heinz Gödderz wrote:

Hi,
Stefan Weigel schrieb:

Hi,

Am 10.01.2011 00:51, schrieb Sigrid Carrera:

  

Reason for not using those forums was that there are already a few
(good!) fora out there and we don't want to fight against them. In
contrast, I think, it was planned to link to those forums from our
website.


That´s why I even advocate closing down http://libreofficeforum.org/

However, there is lots of discussion about creating yet another
forum. And I fear lots of energy is being put into this. Kind of
makes me desperate.

Stefan

Just a question:

Are they LibO-fora? OOo-fora? or mixed fora?

is there any other forum only for LibO ?

my 2 cent
Karl-Heinz



The one listed above is for LibO, though I am sure that if someone ask 
an OOo related question it would not be turned down or told off.




--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] [Forum]How will the forum be organized?

On Tue, 2011-01-11 at 00:02 +0800, David Nelson wrote:
 Hi Drew, :-)
 
 On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 22:11, drew d...@baseanswers.com wrote:
  It doesn't sound good to me.
 
 So can you clarify what your position is with regard to Nabble? 

Hi David,

Sure - I would use nabble the way it is currently configured..but then I
may be bias on that.

There are already a number of people signing up there and beginning to
use it to post to the mailing lists, more then I expected actually.

To make nabble read only would be to circumvent the real advantage of
making if available, the ability to post to a LibreOffice/TDF mailing
without being moderated, in other words subscribed, but without having
to deal with every response going to your mail box.

Sure same deal with a few other options, but that is then thing about
choice, different solutions appeal to different people.

Thanks

Drew


-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] [Forum]How will the forum be organized?

2011-01-10 Thread Fabián Rodríguez

On 11-01-09 08:28 PM, Andy Brown wrote:
 On Sun Jan 09 2011 07:04:12 GMT-0800 (PST)  RGB ES wrote:
 https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/forums/
 They are hidden (no link on the help page) and you cannot post on
 them yet, but they exists and you can register ;) So my question is:
 how those forums will be organized? There will be one for each local
 site or only one on English? Categories? Organization (moderators,
 etc.)?
 Regards
 Ricardo


 Why add another forum?  There is already a LibO Forum at
 http://libreofficeforum.org/forum .  The Official OOo Forum at
 http://user.services.openoffice.org/en/forum/ not only supports OOo
 but off shoots such as Libo, NeoOffice and StarOffice.  The
 Un-official Forum at http://www.oooforum.org/ is the oldest and
 largest OOo related support forum around and has received LibO
 questions and answers in the past few months.

 Andy


I just registered to http://libreofficeforum.org and I am fairly certain
it uses Drupal. I took the liberty to contact its creator and he's
already indicated he's willing to collaborate:

I would be glad to see LibreOfficeForum.org as the official forum. I
personally am not a developer, and I don't have any official role in
LibreOffice. For years I have been a heavy user of OpenOffice, spending
many hours on it every day. And now I'm sure that the way forward is
LibreOffice. I'm not an expert yet, just a heavy user. ;-)

I created the site immediately after LibreOffice was announced, because
I saw that they had no web forums, and I personally don't like mailing
lists. And I know that there are several unofficial forums as well for
OpenOffice (like oooforum.org), so I'm sure that this site could also
occupy that role if the Document Foundation doesn't approve it officially.

It appears likely that LibreOffice will continue to diverge more and
more from the code base of OpenOffice, and it would be confusing to see
bugs and support requests for two different products in the same forum.
So for that reason I would personally recommend that the Document
Foundation not continue to use the same user.services.openoffice.org
forum for LibreOffice.

- Sam

I supposed someone from TDF / steering committee could maintain this
contact more formally than me, I hope I am not overstepping anyone when
doing this.

Cheers,

Fabian

--
LibreOffice questions ? Des questions sur LibreOffice ? Preguntas acerca
de LibreOffice ? Ask LibreOffice: http://libreoffice.shapado.com/
~
Fabián Rodríguez
http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/User:MagicFab


-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] [Forum]How will the forum be organized?

2011-01-10 Thread Charles-H. Schulz

Fabian,

2011/1/10 Fabián Rodríguez magic...@member.fsf.org

 On 11-01-09 08:28 PM, Andy Brown wrote:
  On Sun Jan 09 2011 07:04:12 GMT-0800 (PST)  RGB ES wrote:
  https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/forums/
  They are hidden (no link on the help page) and you cannot post on
  them yet, but they exists and you can register ;) So my question is:
  how those forums will be organized? There will be one for each local
  site or only one on English? Categories? Organization (moderators,
  etc.)?
  Regards
  Ricardo
 
 
  Why add another forum?  There is already a LibO Forum at
  http://libreofficeforum.org/forum .  The Official OOo Forum at
  http://user.services.openoffice.org/en/forum/ not only supports OOo
  but off shoots such as Libo, NeoOffice and StarOffice.  The
  Un-official Forum at http://www.oooforum.org/ is the oldest and
  largest OOo related support forum around and has received LibO
  questions and answers in the past few months.
 
  Andy
 

 I just registered to http://libreofficeforum.org and I am fairly certain
 it uses Drupal. I took the liberty to contact its creator and he's
 already indicated he's willing to collaborate:

 I would be glad to see LibreOfficeForum.org as the official forum. I
 personally am not a developer, and I don't have any official role in
 LibreOffice. For years I have been a heavy user of OpenOffice, spending
 many hours on it every day. And now I'm sure that the way forward is
 LibreOffice. I'm not an expert yet, just a heavy user. ;-)

 I created the site immediately after LibreOffice was announced, because
 I saw that they had no web forums, and I personally don't like mailing
 lists. And I know that there are several unofficial forums as well for
 OpenOffice (like oooforum.org), so I'm sure that this site could also
 occupy that role if the Document Foundation doesn't approve it officially.

 It appears likely that LibreOffice will continue to diverge more and
 more from the code base of OpenOffice, and it would be confusing to see
 bugs and support requests for two different products in the same forum.
 So for that reason I would personally recommend that the Document
 Foundation not continue to use the same user.services.openoffice.org
 forum for LibreOffice.

 - Sam

 I supposed someone from TDF / steering committee could maintain this
 contact more formally than me, I hope I am not overstepping anyone when
 doing this.


Well, this could be a great solution. Sophie, we should discuss this -at
least quickly- at the next SC call, what do you think?

Best,
Charles.



 Cheers,

 Fabian

 --
 LibreOffice questions ? Des questions sur LibreOffice ? Preguntas acerca
 de LibreOffice ? Ask LibreOffice: http://libreoffice.shapado.com/
 ~
 Fabián Rodríguez
 http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/User:MagicFab


 --
 Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to 
 discuss+h...@documentfoundation.orgdiscuss%2bh...@documentfoundation.org
 Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
 *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***



-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

[tdf-discuss] [Forum]How will the forum be organized?

2011-01-09 Thread RGB ES

https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/forums/
They are hidden (no link on the help page) and you cannot post on
them yet, but they exists and you can register ;) So my question is:
how those forums will be organized? There will be one for each local
site or only one on English? Categories? Organization (moderators,
etc.)?
Regards
Ricardo

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] [Forum]How will the forum be organized?

2011-01-09 Thread James Wilde


On Jan 9, 2011, at 16:04 , RGB ES wrote:

 https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/forums/
 They are hidden (no link on the help page) and you cannot post on
 them yet, but they exists and you can register ;) So my question is:
 how those forums will be organized? There will be one for each local
 site or only one on English? Categories? Organization (moderators,
 etc.)?

Good stuff, Ricardo.

I would imagine that the main headers will have to reflect the structure of the 
mailing lists, such as users, website, documentation, discuss, moderators and I 
believe there are one or two others that I'm not subscribed to.  I assume there 
is some way to determine which ones one has access to.  I wouldn't expect 
anyone but moderators and of course the systems people to have or need access 
to, say, the moderators forum for example.  And there might be a small section 
for off-topic stuff, such as a forum called introductions, where people could 
say hello, etc.   Somewhere, perhaps in the OT section, there should be a forum 
for suggestions and requests.

Within users, there should be the usual subdivisions of, say, getting, 
installing, and then one for each of the applications.  Also an announce forum, 
which might be read-only.

I'm assuming the moderators can fix so-called sticky threads, ones which remain 
at the top of the subdivision, such as forum rules, etc.  And I'm also assuming 
that the moderators can move threads if they appear in the wrong subdivision or 
even division.  And might even have the ability to make a person's account 
read-only if (s)he gets too stroppy.  That way the stroppy person can still see 
the messages, but cannot post except perhaps by sending a post to the 
moderators.

Naturally one expects that it will grow organically, and fora and sections will 
be added as they seem to be necessary, but it would be good to have a basic 
structure in place when it opens.

And BTW, I assume that there will be a prominent link on - preferably - the 
home page called Forum.

//James


-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] [Forum]How will the forum be organized?

2011-01-09 Thread Sigrid Carrera

Hi,

I feel bad to bring you bad news, but if I remember this correctly,
the forum, that comes with Silverstripe won't be used. Right now it is
just used for the people who want to work on the homepage to register
so that they can be given the appropriate rights.

Reason for not using those forums was that there are already a few
(good!) fora out there and we don't want to fight against them. In
contrast, I think, it was planned to link to those forums from our
website.

HTH

Sigrid

 PS: If I have written complete nonsense, then I'm sure, that one of
the founders / administrators will correct me. ;)

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] [Forum]How will the forum be organized?

2011-01-09 Thread Christian Lohmaier

Hi Sophie, *,

On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 12:51 AM, Sigrid Carrera
sigrid.carr...@googlemail.com wrote:

  PS: If I have written complete nonsense, then I'm sure, that one of
 the founders / administrators will correct me. ;)

No, your explanation was totally correct - the forum is only meant to
allow people to create an account to work on the website and to manage
their profile. Using the forum module just was easier than to write
user-login and user-profile management pages myself.

The only thing I could imagine using it would be to discuss
silverstripe/website specific problems, but then again: I personally
prefer the mailinglists.

For user support, the existing, dedicated forums should be used.

ciao
Christian

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] [Forum]How will the forum be organized?

2011-01-09 Thread Andy Brown


On Sun Jan 09 2011 07:04:12 GMT-0800 (PST)  RGB ES wrote:

https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/forums/
They are hidden (no link on the help page) and you cannot post on
them yet, but they exists and you can register ;) So my question is:
how those forums will be organized? There will be one for each local
site or only one on English? Categories? Organization (moderators,
etc.)?
Regards
Ricardo



Why add another forum?  There is already a LibO Forum at 
http://libreofficeforum.org/forum .  The Official OOo Forum at 
http://user.services.openoffice.org/en/forum/ not only supports OOo but 
off shoots such as Libo, NeoOffice and StarOffice.  The Un-official 
Forum at http://www.oooforum.org/ is the oldest and largest OOo related 
support forum around and has received LibO questions and answers in the 
past few months.


Andy

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] [Forum]How will the forum be organized?

2011-01-09 Thread drew

On Sun, 2011-01-09 at 16:04 +0100, RGB ES wrote:
 https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/forums/
 They are hidden (no link on the help page) and you cannot post on
 them yet, but they exists and you can register ;) So my question is:
 how those forums will be organized? There will be one for each local
 site or only one on English? Categories? Organization (moderators,
 etc.)?
 Regards
 Ricardo
 

Howdy Ricardo,

May I just ask first, before responding to others. You where part of the
discussion on the user services forum, I think, at least I am pretty
sure you would have read the last discussion in the admin area.

So - do you think we should have a LibreOffice web forum?

Thanks

Drew



-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] [Forum]How will the forum be organized?

2011-01-09 Thread drew

On Mon, 2011-01-10 at 08:24 +0800, David Nelson wrote:
 Instead, we have a Nabble interface to the mailing lists:
 http://nabble.documentfoundation.org 

Personally I would not use the forum functions in the nabble interface,
but as a straight view to the mailing list archives I don't see a
problem. I would explain why not the forum functions if you like, in a
follow up mail.

But for this email, if you guys want to integrate it I don't see why it
would not be easily done - I would think, don't know, it should be very
similar to adding the twitter notification box, or a CSE js.

There are pros and cons - Language is one. English only for the nabble
interface. But that isn't maybe a problem, if one limits it to the en
pages...anyway that would be the NL teams call I would say.

You can link in at any level - so a page can start at the user list, or
can start at the libreoffice level above, or a NL level.

For myself I would not use nabble as a substitute for a full forum, or
one of the newer forum/rate/FAQ style systems - but different subject
and different thread on the ML.

But that is just what I think, I registered the nabble site and intended
to make it public, I would not of used the forum functions, but since
then it's moved to the main site so it's not my call anymore.

Best wishes,

Drew





-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] [Forum]How will the forum be organized?

2011-01-09 Thread Andy Brown


On Sun Jan 09 2011 19:33:06 GMT-0800 (PST)  drew wrote:


Hi Andy


You missed one - there is a new site wanting to offer LibreOffice
support 


- one of the newer UX designs, which to me looks pretty much like taking
the most common mods I see at support oriented web forums and throwing
away most of the fluff - then tie it into a wiki/FAQ and voila much
different and I think better experience. 


- you can see the type of site here:
http://ask.debian.net/


The new LO specific site I think is http://libreoffice.shapado.com  


Thanks for the link.  Have added it to my list. :)  It is a new one for me.


Anyway - I noticed the site a few days ago and the operators have
mentioned it on the lists, en and fr a few times.

Some will not want forums no matter what, for their own reasons and I
would not be so bold as to guess why. Some still want more cake.


Since my computer time dates back to the old BBS days I prefer email 
over forums but I can understand why some others would prefer forums, 
for one time questions and not wanting to get overloaded with emails.



Anyway - you are correct that for the moment the applications are close
enough that any of the existing sites can give reasonable help, that
will change quickly I think.


From the replies I have seen on the forums there will be people around 
that are following and using LibO so even if the differences get far 
apart there will be those that can and will help.



Best wishes,

Drew


Hope you Holidays where happy and rewarding.

Andy

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] [Forum]How will the forum be organized?

2011-01-09 Thread drew

On Sun, 2011-01-09 at 19:54 -0800, Andy Brown wrote:

 
 Since my computer time dates back to the old BBS days I prefer email 
 over forums but I can understand why some others would prefer forums, 
 for one time questions and not wanting to get overloaded with emails.
 

Actually, IMO, it isn't a question of web forums vs no web forums,
assuming our efforts are successful and a large number of LibreOffice
users materialize - something I feel strongly will happen - then sites
will open to support them, beyond just these two. OO.o (extended and
unofficial) had nearly two dozen different web forums or wikis scattered
about, and I bet I missed a few.

This is good I think, these third party support sites - it is the
economic engine of the FOSS world if you think about it.

The question is, I believe, only that of whether there is a web forum
within the project domains and I do understand that different people can
come to honest differences of opinion on the merit of that.

Thanks

Drew


-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

[tdf-discuss] A how to

2011-01-03 Thread Andy Brown

To keep from expanding an already over used thread I started a new one
for this. Consider it as different view of a dead topic if you wish but
it is written to help others understand ways to help and provide
something beneficial to the community.

Some weeks back I had an idea that I though might benefit Libo, a change
in the way Calc sheets were copied and renamed. I sent a email to
Michael with an idea. He replied and suggested that I add the idea to
the Easy Hacks wiki, http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Easy_Hacks ,
which I did. Much to my surprise it was not to long I saw that one of
the developers had picked it up and was working on the idea. The
suggestion has now been added to the mail branch and should show up in
the 3.4 version of Libo. The item has been moved to the Completed
Easy Hacks section,
http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/Easy_Hacks/Completed#Change_Sheet_copy_process
. To see how it will look see
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/5215855/c-m-process.pdf , this is screen shots
showing current and future looks.

I wanted to try this myself but not being a programmer and not knowing
where to even start I when to those that know how and when to make the
change/addition. I would suggest to others, like myself, do the same.

The saying Help me to change the things I can, accept the things I
can't and the wisdom to know the difference sure comes to mind sometimes.

Andy

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] [SC] How to define Membership within TDF?

2010-10-26 Thread Gianluca Turconi


Thorsten Behrens wrote:

hm, I guess most rules can be gamed, by any sufficiently determined
adversary - so I would favour simple, effective bylaws, and use
common sense otherwise.

Additionally, you want to provide the proverbial Big Corp some
incentive to join - note that this was one specific shortcoming of
the OOo project. If they don't see a chance to have at least some
say, why should they sponsor developers in the first place?


Sorry, but I still see in your words the same misunderstanding between 
Foundation and Community that generated my initial reply in this thread.


IMO, if a corporation wants to have a word in a decision about where the 
project goes, it should join the Foundation and respect its rules.


Any other type of contribution is surely appreciated but, IMO, it's very 
far from granting a *right* to influence where the project goes.


Maybe, this consideration depends on what foundation are in my country: 
very strong and well defined legal entities that are different from a 
simple association.


Sincerely, I still see the Foundation affair a bit too foggy and I'm 
not sure I'll like it at the end.


Regards,
--
Gianluca Turconi

--
E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org for instructions on how to 
unsubscribe
List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be 
deleted

Re: [tdf-discuss] [SC] How to define Membership within TDF?

2010-10-26 Thread Marc Paré


Le 2010-10-26 07:09, Gianluca Turconi a écrit :

Thorsten Behrens wrote:

hm, I guess most rules can be gamed, by any sufficiently determined
adversary - so I would favour simple, effective bylaws, and use
common sense otherwise.

Additionally, you want to provide the proverbial Big Corp some
incentive to join - note that this was one specific shortcoming of
the OOo project. If they don't see a chance to have at least some
say, why should they sponsor developers in the first place?


Sorry, but I still see in your words the same misunderstanding between
Foundation and Community that generated my initial reply in this thread.

IMO, if a corporation wants to have a word in a decision about where the
project goes, it should join the Foundation and respect its rules.

Any other type of contribution is surely appreciated but, IMO, it's very
far from granting a *right* to influence where the project goes.

Maybe, this consideration depends on what foundation are in my country:
very strong and well defined legal entities that are different from a
simple association.

Sincerely, I still see the Foundation affair a bit too foggy and I'm
not sure I'll like it at the end.

Regards,


Hi Gianluca:

I think that we are all agreed that the financial contributions by 
corporations should not influence the direction of the project and that 
members of the LibO will always be in charge of the project. However, 
that said, it would make sense that large contributors should be 
recognized in some way and should perhaps have some say along with the 
membership in some aspects of the LibO project. I don't think that 
anyone is suggesting that corporations could just contribute and 
therefore take complete or partial control of the LibO project or some 
aspects of the LibO project. They we can allow them some say somewhere.


Marc


--
E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org for instructions on how to 
unsubscribe
List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be 
deleted

Re: [tdf-discuss] [SC] How to define Membership within TDF?

2010-10-25 Thread Thorsten Behrens

Gianluca Turconi wrote:
 Hypothetical example: Google Corp. develops a large chunk of code for
 LibreOffice. It's an important contribution, of course, and Google would
 belong to the wider LibO community, but is this big contribution
 enough to
 join the steering group of TDF?
 
 No - but it enough for those people at google, who contributed this code
 to be eligible for a seat in the board. And it is enough to have a
 vote at board elections.
 
 Wow, that last sentence is *exactly* what I *don't* want. :)
 
 Such informal approach is impracticable when a *real* Foundation has
 to take decisions in
 order to legally defend the base code, create a sure development
 roadmap (or nominate who create the roadmap)
 and decide about controversial alliances.
 
 Stricter initial rules make stronger organizations in the long run.
 
Hi Gianluca,

hm, I guess most rules can be gamed, by any sufficiently determined
adversary - so I would favour simple, effective bylaws, and use
common sense otherwise.

Additionally, you want to provide the proverbial Big Corp some
incentive to join - note that this was one specific shortcoming of
the OOo project. If they don't see a chance to have at least some
say, why should they sponsor developers in the first place?

Gnome e.g. has the advisory board, where corporations (in contrast
to individual members) are grouped:

http://live.gnome.org/AdvisoryBoard

Institutional membership to Gnome has an annual fee (some lower
5-digit figure, IIRC), that allows the foundation to cover
administrative costs, hold a conference etc. Personal membership,
though, should have low/zero annual cost.

Also, with the proposed membership committee, there'll be humans
having the final say over who's becoming a member and who's not -
pick that group wisely, and I don't see much issues with the
process. ;)

Cheers,

-- Thorsten

--
E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org for instructions on how to 
unsubscribe
List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be 
deleted

Re: [tdf-discuss] [SC] How to define Membership within TDF?

2010-10-21 Thread Drew Jensen


on Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 10:29 PM, Drew Jensen d...@baseanswers.com
meant to write:
- sorry, the pronoun 'you' - I was _not_ talking about you the individual 
there. 
 
 Ahh, yes of course Sorry! Silly me !
 

Best wishes,

Drew



-- 
E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org for instructions on how to 
unsubscribe
List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be 
deleted

Re: [tdf-discuss] [SC] How to define Membership within TDF?

2010-10-21 Thread Charles-H. Schulz

Ciao Gianluca,

Le Thu, 21 Oct 2010 14:37:14 +0200,
Gianluca Turconi m...@letturefantastiche.com a écrit :

 Il 20/10/2010 17.37, Charles-H. Schulz ha scritto:
  yes. So now, do you like what you see?:-)
 
 Well, generally speaking, yes.
 
 I'm just a bit worried about the point of view about membership 
 expressed by Drew Jensen.
 
 Developers are surely a part of the Community core, but just a part.

Yes, but I think, at least in the part for the lobbying, that Drew
thinks of that as something that amounts to what I call advocacy. I do
lobbying professionally, and it involves expertise, writing papers,
documents, filing forms, following strategies, etc. And its a lot of
work, so if I were to do this -I'm not doing it for TDF- I would
expect, to see my contribution recognized, and would have tangible
evidences to show to the membership committee. 

 
 I've read your opinion too and I hope it will definitely prevail in
 the end by quantifying the intellectual contribution needed in
 order to join TDF.
 
 I simply don't want to see a division and disagreement between devs
 and laymen as a respin of the previous division between corporate
 employees and volunteers in the OOo Community.

While I do absolutely agree that there should be no divide, (heck, I'm
no developer myself), I also think that certain activities are
appreciated but cannot constitute the only basis for membership
consideration. But here, we're going down into details, which is good.

Best,
Charles. 

 
 Regards,



-- 
Charles-H. Schulz
Membre du Comité exécutif
The Document Foundation.

--
E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org for instructions on how to 
unsubscribe
List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be 
deleted

Re: [tdf-discuss] [SC] How to define Membership within TDF?

2010-10-20 Thread Sebastian Spaeth

On Tue, 19 Oct 2010 17:39:29 +0200, Gianluca Turconi 
m...@letturefantastiche.com wrote:
 I see: The Document Foundation (members: Charles-H. Schulz, Google, 
 whoever-you-want) with its steering committee/council;
 
 While it seem you and others see: The Document Foundation + Google + 
 Whoever-you-want that collaborate with each other and have a common 
 council for the most important decisions.

There is no reason why there could not be a proper foundation that acts
as custodian for e.g. technical infrastructure, and holds eventual
trademarks and decides on licensing policies for these etc. and a wider
council that is composed of all contributors.

Again, compare with the OpenStreetMap foundation
(http://www.osmfoundation.org/wiki/OSMF:About) with about 250 members
(that makes the eligable to elect the steering committee for example),
yet the recent relicensing campaign is decided by all x-thousand
contributors.

There is no reason why decisions like which GUI to adopt etc cannot be
voted on by a wider community (which is organized and blessed by the
TDF). I am not sure we want to have open-for-all polls on things like
we should discard mono, they are too prone to slashdot-initiated
rigging and allows the non-contributing majority to make decisions they
don't have to implement. After all the term meritocracy appears pretty
often in relation with the TDF ...

But as I am no lawyer and don't plan to implement governance things, I
am going to shut up now :).

Sebastian

-- 
E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org for instructions on how to 
unsubscribe
List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be 
deleted

Re: [tdf-discuss] [SC] How to define Membership within TDF?


Il 19/10/2010 18.11, Charles-H. Schulz ha scritto:

[...]


Well, I think that the split between these two visions is somewhat
articifical. To be frank I don't think I ever had thought about this
that way. And in fact I don't see why the two models you defined are so
stringently different, but let's proceed according to your lines: why
the model you see (let's put aside the model you think we see for a
minute ;-)) is better than the other one. (I have no religion here, I'm
trying to understand, and it's good because we're having a really
important discussion which is not even an argument :-) )


Outside alliances and collaborations (the second model) are based on 
commons interests that can be very volatile.


They can diverge because of a job change, market evolution, new CEOs, 
graduation, family duties, and so on.


On the other hand, the first model involves a *legal* commitment, with 
stronger duties and rights, and a formal involvement in an organization 
that has not *mere* interests, but statutory purposes.


It's the same difference that there is between marriage and cohabitation.

They are two different level of engagement. Outside observers can see 
the difference too. Think about the difference in perception about these 
sentences:


Google *joins* TDF

and

Google *collaborate* with TDF

There is a completely different feeling of supporting strength.

Of course people and corporations can quit a foundation too, but it's 
surely less easy that kind of disengagement, just like people think 
thrice before divorcing.


Furthermore, a central independent association with its own council, 
that steers the Community efforts, allows not lo lose focus on 
Chrarter's purposes.


An enlarged group with a supreme committee may include people with 
very different and transient interests that may or may not correspond to 
the Charter's purposes.


[...]


I don't think it's that simple. First of all, it takes time and
meaningful contributions to become a member, and remember, memberships
have to be accepted (see the lower administrative section on the wiki
page) and contributions can be rejected on various reasons (the patch
is not correct, the logo looks shady, etc.) So I think that this might
not be the chaos that some here might fear imho... please advise.


Well, we're now talking about *meaningful* contribution and 
evaluation... ;-)


That's an important step ahead.

On the wiki a read: all these contributions need to be non-trivial and 
last for a certain time frame.


Then, there's a desperate need for a clear definition about what is 
*enough* to join TDF: 10 lines of code? A logo? 1000 work hours?


A too low entry level increases the risks of hijacking, a too high entry 
level hinder the growing of the Foundation.


In a two level acceptation process (contribution + evaluation of 
contribution by current members) it's fundamental, IMO, to set a level 
of contribution for membership that can be considered *consistent* in 
time and/or work and is *certain*.


The contributor has a goal and the foundation still keeps a partially 
discretional judgement of opportunity about his/her membership.


10 lines of code or a logo? Too low, at least *if* there is only *one* 
class of foundation members.


Regards,
--
Gianluca Turconi

--
E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org for instructions on how to 
unsubscribe
List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be 
deleted

Re: [tdf-discuss] [SC] How to define Membership within TDF?


Il 19/10/2010 20.13, André Schnabel ha scritto:

[...]


You can help and support us by becoming a member of the OpenStreetMap
Foundation. The membership fee is £15 per year and enables you to
influence the direction of OpenStreetMap by being able to vote in
elections for officers of the foundation.


This just means that I can buy in? I agree, that this is definately
formal - but how does this help have the foundation act in favour of
it's projects?

Still - I try to understand.


It is not important an entry fee, but IMO it should exist a stronger 
filter for members' acceptance.


In another branch of this thread, I was discussing with Charles a two 
phase procedure:


a) contribution by the applicant;
b) evaluation of that contribution by current members before acceptance 
of membership for TDF.


Under point a), the contribution should be consistent in contributed 
time and work (not too high, not too low entry level) so that applicants 
can be creamed off and risks of hijacking decreased.


Under point b), the evaluation should not, IMO, be merely technical 
(i.e. a patch is refused) but it should include a judgment of 
opportunity about membership.


It would be a compromise between a fully free membership process and a 
completely discretionary one.

--
Gianluca Turconi

--
E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org for instructions on how to 
unsubscribe
List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be 
deleted

Re: [tdf-discuss] [SC] How to define Membership within TDF?

2010-10-20 Thread Andre Schnabel

Hi,

 Von: Sebastian Spaeth sebast...@sspaeth.de

 On Tue, 19 Oct 2010 17:39:29 +0200, Gianluca Turconi
 m...@letturefantastiche.com wrote:
  I see: The Document Foundation (members: Charles-H. Schulz, Google, 
  whoever-you-want) with its steering committee/council;
  
  While it seem you and others see: The Document Foundation + Google + 
  Whoever-you-want that collaborate with each other and have a common 
  council for the most important decisions.
 
 There is no reason why there could not be a proper foundation that acts
 as custodian for e.g. technical infrastructure, and holds eventual
 trademarks and decides on licensing policies for these etc. and a wider
 council that is composed of all contributors.

Indeed this should be the picture. 
Maybe I am thinking to much in terms of German (foundation) law already,
where:
- the foundation is an legal entity that has no members (but may have 
staff)
- the foundation is bound to it's bylaws
- the foundation is directed by a board (which has to be defined in the 
byaws)

So the board of the foundation is the ultimate decision making entity.
(Very likely to be the current SC for the first time.)

There will be a wider council of contributors. What we currently discuss
is how this council is established.

At the same time I don't want to have the SC separated from the wider 
council. If we do so, we would again have the situation, that contributing
members have no power on decisions of the foundation's board.

I may be wrong with this - maybe someone can explain a better way.


 
 Again, compare with the OpenStreetMap foundation
 (http://www.osmfoundation.org/wiki/OSMF:About) with about 250 members
 (that makes the eligable to elect the steering committee for example),
 yet the recent relicensing campaign is decided by all x-thousand
 contributors.

Again - It was not the intention to have a board of the foundation
that consist of all the 1000 contributors. But I don't see the benefit
of having a set of contributors working for the projects that a foundation
supports and a nother set of people that just can by a seat in the 
foundation and then have voting powers. This would result in something
like the MS bought ISO story.


 
 But as I am no lawyer and don't plan to implement governance things, I
 am going to shut up now :).

Well - we just want to make sure that you are happy and does not find
your contributions are misused. So - I just try to understand.


André
-- 
GMX DSL Doppel-Flat ab 19,99 euro;/mtl.! Jetzt auch mit 
gratis Notebook-Flat! http://portal.gmx.net/de/go/dsl

-- 
E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org for instructions on how to 
unsubscribe
List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be 
deleted

Re: [tdf-discuss] [SC] How to define Membership within TDF?

2010-10-20 Thread Andre Schnabel

Hi Gainluca,


 
 Well, we're now talking about *meaningful* contribution and 
 evaluation... ;-)
 
 That's an important step ahead.
 
 On the wiki a read: all these contributions need to be non-trivial and 
 last for a certain time frame.
 
 Then, there's a desperate need for a clear definition about what is 
 *enough* to join TDF: 10 lines of code? A logo? 1000 work hours?
 
 A too low entry level increases the risks of hijacking, a too high entry 
 level hinder the growing of the Foundation.
 
 In a two level acceptation process (contribution + evaluation of 
 contribution by current members) it's fundamental, IMO, to set a level 
 of contribution for membership that can be considered *consistent* in 
 time and/or work and is *certain*.


Ok, so may we agree to the general idea to this process (contribute - 
apply for membership - contributions gets evaluated - membership gets
approved or denied) but need to find a good definition what amount / time
of contributions qualify for acceptance?

regards,

André
-- 
GRATIS! Movie-FLAT mit über 300 Videos. 
Jetzt freischalten unter http://portal.gmx.net/de/go/maxdome

-- 
E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org for instructions on how to 
unsubscribe
List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be 
deleted

Re: [tdf-discuss] [SC] How to define Membership within TDF?


Il 20/10/2010 9.53, Sebastian Spaeth ha scritto:

[...]


There is no reason why there could not be a proper foundation that acts
as custodian for e.g. technical infrastructure, and holds eventual
trademarks and decides on licensing policies for these etc. and a wider
council that is composed of all contributors.


Nah... it's a legal nightmare.

Some people (Foundation's members) would have all duties and other 
people (outside supporters with vote in the steering council) all rights 
and no duty.


Liability is not just a word when decisions are made.


There is no reason why decisions like which GUI to adopt etc cannot be
voted on by a wider community (which is organized and blessed by the
TDF).


That's another matter.

The members of the Foundation can decide that some kind of problems can 
be solved even by a public poll.


However, the *members* of the *Foundation* *decide*. Of course, it's so 
*if* this foundation has to have a steering role in the community, only.

--
Gianluca Turconi

--
E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org for instructions on how to 
unsubscribe
List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be 
deleted

Re: [tdf-discuss] [SC] How to define Membership within TDF?

2010-10-20 Thread Marc Paré


Le 2010-10-20 04:41, Gianluca Turconi a écrit :

Il 20/10/2010 9.53, Sebastian Spaeth ha scritto:

[...]


There is no reason why there could not be a proper foundation that acts
as custodian for e.g. technical infrastructure, and holds eventual
trademarks and decides on licensing policies for these etc. and a wider
council that is composed of all contributors.


Nah... it's a legal nightmare.

Some people (Foundation's members) would have all duties and other
people (outside supporters with vote in the steering council) all rights
and no duty.


I think in this case, no individuals, but the foundation would hold the 
rights.




Liability is not just a word when decisions are made.


There is no reason why decisions like which GUI to adopt etc cannot be
voted on by a wider community (which is organized and blessed by the
TDF).


That's another matter.

The members of the Foundation can decide that some kind of problems can
be solved even by a public poll.

However, the *members* of the *Foundation* *decide*. Of course, it's so
*if* this foundation has to have a steering role in the community, only.


I agree with this concept but more like this: The Document Foundation 
would have more of a steering role in the community and the projects 
underneath become more members of their respective projects. In this 
case LibO. Pyramid style with the Foundation at the top.


Marc


--
E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org for instructions on how to 
unsubscribe
List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be 
deleted

Re: [tdf-discuss] [SC] How to define Membership within TDF?


Il 20/10/2010 11.34, Marc Paré ha scritto:

[...]


However, the *members* of the *Foundation* *decide*. Of course, it's so
*if* this foundation has to have a steering role in the community, only.


I agree with this concept but more like this: The Document Foundation
would have more of a steering role in the community and the projects
underneath become more members of their respective projects. In this
case LibO. Pyramid style with the Foundation at the top.


Uhm...

The relationship between TDF membership and TDF multiple projects is 
another issue that has to be discussed *in the future*.


Example: I've contributed to LibO and gained TDF membership, can I vote 
and decide for a TDF Mail  Calendar subproject for which I've 
contributed nothing?

--
Gianluca Turconi

--
E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org for instructions on how to 
unsubscribe
List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be 
deleted

Re: [tdf-discuss] [SC] How to define Membership within TDF?

On Wed, 2010-10-20 at 10:33 +0200, Andre Schnabel wrote:
 Hi Gainluca,
 
 
  
  Well, we're now talking about *meaningful* contribution and 
  evaluation... ;-)
  
  That's an important step ahead.
  
  On the wiki a read: all these contributions need to be non-trivial and 
  last for a certain time frame.
  
  Then, there's a desperate need for a clear definition about what is 
  *enough* to join TDF: 10 lines of code? A logo? 1000 work hours?
  
  A too low entry level increases the risks of hijacking, a too high entry 
  level hinder the growing of the Foundation.
  
  In a two level acceptation process (contribution + evaluation of 
  contribution by current members) it's fundamental, IMO, to set a level 
  of contribution for membership that can be considered *consistent* in 
  time and/or work and is *certain*.
 
 
 Ok, so may we agree to the general idea to this process (contribute - 
 apply for membership - contributions gets evaluated - membership gets
 approved or denied) but need to find a good definition what amount / time
 of contributions qualify for acceptance?
 

 
Hello André,

I like the above paragraph also - as for strict or general requirements,
I would tend to favor general, it is IMO the only workable way to get
quality of contribution into the mix.

One question:

Beyond voting for the 'legal entity' board of directors, what other, if
any, types of issues do you see the general membership voting on?

I ask that to get a feel for the size of the group expected...more on
that as a follow up I think.

Thanks

Drew


-- 
E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org for instructions on how to 
unsubscribe
List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be 
deleted

Re: [tdf-discuss] [SC] How to define Membership within TDF?

2010-10-20 Thread Marc Paré


Le 2010-10-20 07:30, Drew Jensen a écrit :

On Wed, 2010-10-20 at 10:33 +0200, Andre Schnabel wrote:

Hi Gainluca,




Well, we're now talking about *meaningful* contribution and
evaluation... ;-)

That's an important step ahead.

On the wiki a read: all these contributions need to be non-trivial and
last for a certain time frame.

Then, there's a desperate need for a clear definition about what is
*enough* to join TDF: 10 lines of code? A logo? 1000 work hours?

A too low entry level increases the risks of hijacking, a too high entry
level hinder the growing of the Foundation.

In a two level acceptation process (contribution + evaluation of
contribution by current members) it's fundamental, IMO, to set a level
of contribution for membership that can be considered *consistent* in
time and/or work and is *certain*.



Ok, so may we agree to the general idea to this process (contribute -
apply for membership -  contributions gets evaluated -  membership gets
approved or denied) but need to find a good definition what amount / time
of contributions qualify for acceptance?






Hello André,

I like the above paragraph also - as for strict or general requirements,
I would tend to favor general, it is IMO the only workable way to get
quality of contribution into the mix.

One question:

Beyond voting for the 'legal entity' board of directors, what other, if
any, types of issues do you see the general membership voting on?

I ask that to get a feel for the size of the group expected...more on
that as a follow up I think.

Thanks

Drew




If all contributors are eligible to become members through the 
membership designation process, would you not worry that the size of the 
membership being so large as to no longer be an effective 
discussion/voting group. Maybe a consideration of a later group that 
would be an intermediary group between the SC and the TDF membership 
group should be considered. The larger the membership group grows the 
harder it then becomes to get consensus on voting matters.


I also like the idea of membership acceptance process requiring member 
contribution + evaluation by current members. I believe that most 
non-members would expect such a process be in place in order to provide 
some sort of vetting of membership application.


Marc


--
E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org for instructions on how to 
unsubscribe
List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be 
deleted

Re: [tdf-discuss] [SC] How to define Membership within TDF?

2010-10-20 Thread James Walker

I decided I would try to convey my thoughts on this now

First I had a couple of questions

How many member do we envision being on the SC?

How many projects does the SC envision having under the TDF.

Right now I see the need for LibreOffice, and I really do see a need for a
couple other projects.  I would love an android app that opens LibreOffice
files. maybe even a BlackBerry app and some other smartphone apps.

If this is the case, I see the SC being made up of those that are currently
on the SC at the present and then Representatives of the Projects that are
under TDF.  I feel that the projects should vote on those member that will
become members of the SC.  How many from each project should be related to
the size of the project.

The problem as I see it is how do you define the amount of contribution each
person gives, cause in my opinion even the users are contributors to the
project, without the users there would be no need for the project.  So does
simple registration make you a member of the project, or do you need to join
one of the group that we will have?

As for TDF,  I would not be opposed to the members of TDF deciding who can
join, say you want to join TDF, you send in some kind of resume, and the
current members vote you in, or out, if they feel that needs to be the case,
or they can ask for clarifing information if that is needed.  Would I
be opposed to some kind of membership fee to join TDF, no, I have been a
member of several organizations that require a membership fee.  TDF needs
some kind of budget and we all enjoy using the software. I see no issue with
it really.

later as the project progresses and we get more member of TDF, I see
elections to oppoint members of the SC from the larger TDF membership. Now
keep in mind being a member of one of the projects does not mean you are a
member of TDF.  But you would get to vote for the representative to the SC
for your project.


these are just a few of my thoughts, please feel free to comment.

James Walker

-- 
E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org for instructions on how to 
unsubscribe
List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be 
deleted

Re: [tdf-discuss] [SC] How to define Membership within TDF?

2010-10-20 Thread Mike Dupont

On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 4:24 PM, James Walker centra...@gmail.com wrote:
 The problem as I see it is how do you define the amount of contribution each
 person gives, cause in my opinion even the users are contributors to the
 project, without the users there would be no need for the project.

I think the measurement is :

1. what will it cost if you have to rewrite the authors code and all
derived works.
2. what if you just remove the code

This is the type of decision that people have to make when forks are
done and licenses cannot be settled.
mike

-- 
James Michael DuPont
Member of Free Libre Open Source Software Kosova and Albania
flossk.org flossal.org

-- 
E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org for instructions on how to 
unsubscribe
List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be 
deleted

Re: [tdf-discuss] [SC] How to define Membership within TDF?


Il 20/10/2010 16.36, Mike Dupont ha scritto:

1. what will it cost if you have to rewrite the authors code and all
derived works.
2. what if you just remove the code


Contributions are not only code. There are a lot of intangibles.

Marketing, lobbying and advocating work are some examples.
--
Gianluca Turconi

--
E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org for instructions on how to 
unsubscribe
List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be 
deleted

Re: [tdf-discuss] [SC] How to define Membership within TDF?

2010-10-20 Thread Charles-H. Schulz

Le Wed, 20 Oct 2010 16:57:43 +0200,
Gianluca Turconi m...@letturefantastiche.com a écrit :

 Il 20/10/2010 16.36, Mike Dupont ha scritto:
  1. what will it cost if you have to rewrite the authors code and all
  derived works.
  2. what if you just remove the code
 
 Contributions are not only code. There are a lot of intangibles.
 
 Marketing, lobbying and advocating work are some examples.

Yes, but even there we have to find tangible things: delivrables,
events, activities, etc. 

BTW; this discussion is not about how the SC should be composed. It's
about how and who we call contributors/members.

Best,



-- 
Charles-H. Schulz
Membre du Comité exécutif
The Document Foundation.

--
E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org for instructions on how to 
unsubscribe
List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be 
deleted

Re: [tdf-discuss] [SC] How to define Membership within TDF?

On Wed, 2010-10-20 at 16:57 +0200, Gianluca Turconi wrote:
 Il 20/10/2010 16.36, Mike Dupont ha scritto:
  1. what will it cost if you have to rewrite the authors code and all
  derived works.
  2. what if you just remove the code
 
 Contributions are not only code. There are a lot of intangibles.
 
 Marketing, lobbying and advocating work are some examples.

Please let us not expand what defines contribution.

Lobbying should not IMO garner admittance.

Advocating should not.

Working on this project(s) should be the only work that counts.

Thanks,

Drew


-- 
E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org for instructions on how to 
unsubscribe
List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be 
deleted

Re: [tdf-discuss] [SC] How to define Membership within TDF?

On Tue, 2010-10-19 at 21:00 +0800, David Nelson wrote:
 Hi, :-)
 
 Maybe you could just get yourselves sponsored as an Apache Software
 Foundation project 

+1 




-- 
E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org for instructions on how to 
unsubscribe
List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be 
deleted

Re: [tdf-discuss] [SC] How to define Membership within TDF?

2010-10-20 Thread BRM

- Original Message 

 From: Drew Jensen d...@baseanswers.com
 On Wed, 2010-10-20 at 16:57 +0200, Gianluca Turconi wrote:
  Il 20/10/2010  16.36, Mike Dupont ha scritto:
   1. what will it cost if you have to  rewrite the authors code and all
   derived works.
   2.  what if you just remove the code
  
  Contributions are not only  code. There are a lot of intangibles.
  
  Marketing, lobbying and  advocating work are some examples.
 
 Please let us not expand what defines  contribution.
 
 Lobbying should not IMO garner  admittance.
 
 Advocating should not.
 
 Working on this project(s)  should be the only work that counts.

Those who promote the project, and those who provide user support for the 
project do provide substantial services to the project.
Without them, you would have either no users or a small set of users.
Contributions must include them in some way, or the project will suffer.

Ben


-- 
E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org for instructions on how to 
unsubscribe
List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be 
deleted

Re: [tdf-discuss] [SC] How to define Membership within TDF?

On Wed, 2010-10-20 at 13:16 -0400, Drew Jensen wrote:
 On Wed, 2010-10-20 at 16:57 +0200, Gianluca Turconi wrote:
  Il 20/10/2010 16.36, Mike Dupont ha scritto:
   1. what will it cost if you have to rewrite the authors code and all
   derived works.
   2. what if you just remove the code
  
  Contributions are not only code. There are a lot of intangibles.
  
  Marketing, lobbying and advocating work are some examples.
 
 Please let us not expand what defines contribution.
 
 Lobbying should not IMO garner admittance.
 
 Advocating should not.
 
 Working on this project(s) should be the only work that counts.

Actually, I would need to amend that last sentence:


Work on the main project or it's accepted sub-projects. For instance
there may be extensions - either directly as Add-ons to the LibreOffice
package, possibly even extensions to desktop packages with features
specifically created to support LibreOffice and the ODF. 

Thanks

Drew


-- 
E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org for instructions on how to 
unsubscribe
List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be 
deleted

Re: [tdf-discuss] [SC] How to define Membership within TDF?

2010-10-20 Thread Charles-H. Schulz

Hello, 

Le Wed, 20 Oct 2010 13:16:37 -0400,
Drew Jensen d...@baseanswers.com a écrit :

 On Wed, 2010-10-20 at 16:57 +0200, Gianluca Turconi wrote:
  Il 20/10/2010 16.36, Mike Dupont ha scritto:
   1. what will it cost if you have to rewrite the authors code and
   all derived works.
   2. what if you just remove the code
  
  Contributions are not only code. There are a lot of intangibles.
  
  Marketing, lobbying and advocating work are some examples.
 
 Please let us not expand what defines contribution.
 
 Lobbying should not IMO garner admittance.

Why? Lobbying done in a professional way is a lot of work...

Best,
Charles.
 
 Advocating should not.
 
 Working on this project(s) should be the only work that counts.

+1

Charles.

 
 Thanks,
 
 Drew
 
 


--
E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org for instructions on how to 
unsubscribe
List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be 
deleted

Re: [tdf-discuss] [SC] How to define Membership within TDF?

On Wed, 2010-10-20 at 20:30 +0200, Charles-H. Schulz wrote:
 Hello, 
 
 Le Wed, 20 Oct 2010 13:16:37 -0400,
 Drew Jensen d...@baseanswers.com a écrit :
 
  On Wed, 2010-10-20 at 16:57 +0200, Gianluca Turconi wrote:
   Il 20/10/2010 16.36, Mike Dupont ha scritto:
1. what will it cost if you have to rewrite the authors code and
all derived works.
2. what if you just remove the code
   
   Contributions are not only code. There are a lot of intangibles.
   
   Marketing, lobbying and advocating work are some examples.
  
  Please let us not expand what defines contribution.
  
  Lobbying should not IMO garner admittance.
 
 Why? Lobbying done in a professional way is a lot of work...

my opinions follow - so I don't have write IMO 10 times...*smile*

- If you lobby your local government for FOSS (even if LibreOfficee is
included) then I would not consider that as working on this project.

- If you write a lot of blogs that advocate FOSS and LibreOffice I also
would not count that.

- If you you go to shows/events/fairs and you work the halls, that is
not working for this project, even if you mention LibreOffice a lot.

- if you do that AND you also are active on the MLs here, you are on the
marketing conference calls and you pitch in to help write and execute a
marketing plan. Then you _are_ working on the project.

-- I think that is how I would put it, but it could be refined no doubt.


 
 Best,
 Charles.
  
  Advocating should not.
  
  Working on this project(s) should be the only work that counts.
 
 +1
 
 Charles.
 
  
  Thanks,
  
  Drew
  
  
 
 



-- 
E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org for instructions on how to 
unsubscribe
List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be 
deleted

Re: [tdf-discuss] [SC] How to define Membership within TDF?

2010-10-20 Thread Marc Paré


Le 2010-10-20 14:10, Drew Jensen a écrit :

On Wed, 2010-10-20 at 13:16 -0400, Drew Jensen wrote:

On Wed, 2010-10-20 at 16:57 +0200, Gianluca Turconi wrote:

Il 20/10/2010 16.36, Mike Dupont ha scritto:

1. what will it cost if you have to rewrite the authors code and all
derived works.
2. what if you just remove the code


Contributions are not only code. There are a lot of intangibles.

Marketing, lobbying and advocating work are some examples.


Please let us not expand what defines contribution.

Lobbying should not IMO garner admittance.

Advocating should not.

Working on this project(s) should be the only work that counts.


Actually, I would need to amend that last sentence:


Work on the main project or it's accepted sub-projects. For instance
there may be extensions - either directly as Add-ons to the LibreOffice
package, possibly even extensions to desktop packages with features
specifically created to support LibreOffice and the ODF.

Thanks

Drew




So you are proposing that a contributor is someone who has contributed 
either hard code or plug-in code etc. to the project. The contributions 
MUST be associated some way to code or ODF code convention.


Presumably then, no one other than a dev or dev-like contributor could 
become a TDF member.


So, let's take me as an example, I am part of the Canadian Marketing 
Team which is starting from zero resources and contacts. If I make 
arrangements for Marcon's in our 12 regions of my country; make 
arrangements for large city LibO representatives; make arrangements for 
a national conference with conference facilities for our newly expanded 
Canadian Marketing Team and then try to find corporate sponsorship for 
both Canadian Marketing Team and LibO advertising and installfests etc. 
This according to your criteria would not suffice to award me membership 
into the TDF.


Would this not, in some way, be considered as a contributor to the TDF?

If not, then how would I be able to make my voice heard to the TDF 
membership when there was an issue that I would consider important to me 
or LibO?


If yes, then, what measure could we use, to consider such a person as 
described, to award membership status. How much would a person have to 
contribute (I am still taking my example as Canadian Marketing Team 
member) to be awarded membership status?


For that matter, how about the people providing on the localization 
projects?


IMHO, I believe you are skipping one major step by establishing 
membership criteria to the TDF. The hierarchy must be established first 
and then define membership. The hierarchy is pretty well evident as I 
has posted my suggestion re: this before and out of coincidence James 
Walker, in a different way, suggested, on this thread, the same 
organization of the TDF project as I had. I am sure that we will not be 
the only ones to define it this way as it is the natural way to organize 
the groups. (I quote James Walker here for the sake of convenience, below)


-
I decided I would try to convey my thoughts on this now

First I had a couple of questions

How many member do we envision being on the SC?

How many projects does the SC envision having under the TDF.

Right now I see the need for LibreOffice, and I really do see a need for a
couple other projects.  I would love an android app that opens LibreOffice
files. maybe even a BlackBerry app and some other smartphone apps.

If this is the case, I see the SC being made up of those that are currently
on the SC at the present and then Representatives of the Projects that are
under TDF.  I feel that the projects should vote on those member that will
become members of the SC.  How many from each project should be related to
the size of the project.

The problem as I see it is how do you define the amount of contribution each
person gives, cause in my opinion even the users are contributors to the
project, without the users there would be no need for the project.  So does
simple registration make you a member of the project, or do you need to join
one of the group that we will have?

As for TDF,  I would not be opposed to the members of TDF deciding who can
join, say you want to join TDF, you send in some kind of resume, and the
current members vote you in, or out, if they feel that needs to be the case,
or they can ask for clarifing information if that is needed.  Would I
be opposed to some kind of membership fee to join TDF, no, I have been a
member of several organizations that require a membership fee.  TDF needs
some kind of budget and we all enjoy using the software. I see no issue with
it really.

later as the project progresses and we get more member of TDF, I see
elections to oppoint members of the SC from the larger TDF membership. Now
keep in mind being a member of one of the projects does not mean you are a
member of TDF.  But you would get to vote for the representative to the SC
for your project.


these are just a few of my thoughts, please feel free

Re: [tdf-discuss] [SC] How to define Membership within TDF?

On Wed, 2010-10-20 at 14:48 -0400, Marc Paré wrote:
 Le 2010-10-20 14:10, Drew Jensen a écrit :
  On Wed, 2010-10-20 at 13:16 -0400, Drew Jensen wrote:
  On Wed, 2010-10-20 at 16:57 +0200, Gianluca Turconi wrote:
  Il 20/10/2010 16.36, Mike Dupont ha scritto:
  1. what will it cost if you have to rewrite the authors code and all
  derived works.
  2. what if you just remove the code
 
  Contributions are not only code. There are a lot of intangibles.
 
  Marketing, lobbying and advocating work are some examples.
 
  Please let us not expand what defines contribution.
 
  Lobbying should not IMO garner admittance.
 
  Advocating should not.
 
  Working on this project(s) should be the only work that counts.
 
  Actually, I would need to amend that last sentence:
 
 
  Work on the main project or it's accepted sub-projects. For instance
  there may be extensions - either directly as Add-ons to the LibreOffice
  package, possibly even extensions to desktop packages with features
  specifically created to support LibreOffice and the ODF.
 
  Thanks
 
  Drew
 
 
 
 So you are proposing that a contributor is someone who has contributed 
 either hard code or plug-in code etc. to the project. The contributions 
 MUST be associated some way to code or ODF code convention.

If you are asking for membership and your area of contribution is coding
then yes - but it is not the only type of work that is considered.

 
 Presumably then, no one other than a dev or dev-like contributor could 
 become a TDF member.

The draft on the wiki specifically lists marketing and other actions as
working on the project.

 
 So, let's take me as an example, I am part of the Canadian Marketing 
 Team which is starting from zero resources and contacts. If I make 
 arrangements for Marcon's in our 12 regions of my country; make 
 arrangements for large city LibO representatives; make arrangements for 
 a national conference with conference facilities for our newly expanded 
 Canadian Marketing Team and then try to find corporate sponsorship for 
 both Canadian Marketing Team and LibO advertising and installfests etc. 
 This according to your criteria would not suffice to award me membership 
 into the TDF.
 
 Would this not, in some way, be considered as a contributor to the TDF?
 
 If not, then how would I be able to make my voice heard to the TDF 
 membership when there was an issue that I would consider important to me 
 or LibO?
 
 If yes, then, what measure could we use, to consider such a person as 
 described, to award membership status. How much would a person have to 
 contribute (I am still taking my example as Canadian Marketing Team 
 member) to be awarded membership status?

See my response to Charles and Mike a few minutes ago for my thoughts on
that.

 
 For that matter, how about the people providing on the localization 
 projects?

Again specifically mentioned in the draft.

 
 IMHO, I believe you are skipping one major step by establishing 
 membership criteria to the TDF. The hierarchy must be established first 
 and then define membership. 

That is one approach - I don't think it is one that most here would sign
onto..but could be wrong. I'm still chewing that over..

 The hierarchy is pretty well evident as I 
 has posted my suggestion re: this before and out of coincidence James 
 Walker, in a different way, suggested, on this thread, the same 
 organization of the TDF project as I had. I am sure that we will not be 
 the only ones to define it this way as it is the natural way to organize 
 the groups. (I quote James Walker here for the sake of convenience, below)

Thanks - I'll add comments to that email from James.

Drew


-- 
E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org for instructions on how to 
unsubscribe
List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be 
deleted

Re: [tdf-discuss] [SC] How to define Membership within TDF?

2010-10-20 Thread BRM

- Original Message 

 From: Drew Jensen d...@baseanswers.com
 On Wed, 2010-10-20 at 20:30 +0200, Charles-H. Schulz wrote:
  Le Wed, 20 Oct 2010 13:16:37 -0400,
  Drew Jensen d...@baseanswers.com a écrit  :
   On Wed, 2010-10-20 at 16:57 +0200, Gianluca Turconi  wrote:
Il 20/10/2010 16.36, Mike Dupont ha scritto:
  1. what will it cost if you have to rewrite the authors code  and
 all derived works.
 2. what if  you just remove the code

Contributions are  not only code. There are a lot of intangibles.

 Marketing, lobbying and advocating work are some examples.k

 - if you  do that AND you also are active on the MLs here, you are on the
 marketing  conference calls and you pitch in to help write and execute a
 marketing plan.  Then you _are_ working on the project.

Agreed, though I wouldn't just say the MLs, but the forums, etc. You have to be 
part of the community as well; not just out saying things about it.
I've come and gone through a number of communities - Subversion, Samba, PHP, to 
name a couple - over the years as interests, time, and demands require.
I haven't quite contributed to any them in terms of code, but I was 
contributing 
to them in terms of user support - helping people with questions, etc; and in 
some cases submitting feature requests, etc.
All of that is contribution.

Perhaps another model to consider is Gentoo's model - 
http://www.gentoo.org/foundation/en/.
Many contribute on the list, but only a few are brought into the Gentoo 
Foundation.


Ben


--
E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org for instructions on how to 
unsubscribe
List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be 
deleted

Re: [tdf-discuss] [SC] How to define Membership within TDF?

2010-10-20 Thread Mike Dupont

On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 8:43 PM, Drew Jensen d...@baseanswers.com wrote:
 On Wed, 2010-10-20 at 19:45 +0200, Mike Dupont wrote:
 On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 7:19 PM, BRM bm_witn...@yahoo.com wrote:
  - Original Message 
 
  From: Drew Jensen d...@baseanswers.com
  On Wed, 2010-10-20 at 16:57 +0200, Gianluca Turconi wrote:
   Il 20/10/2010  16.36, Mike Dupont ha scritto:
1. what will it cost if you have to  rewrite the authors code and all
derived works.
2.  what if you just remove the code
  
   Contributions are not only  code. There are a lot of intangibles.
  
   Marketing, lobbying and  advocating work are some examples.
 
  Please let us not expand what defines  contribution.
 
  Lobbying should not IMO garner  admittance.
 
  Advocating should not.

 You can define contribution as documents or commits to a repository or
 wiki, or recruiting of new members to a team, you can define karma
 like ubuntu lauchpad does.

 I have done alot of advocating and promoting of OOO in Kosovo,

 Hello Mike,

 Ok - let's try to refine this.


 trying to find translators and also aquiring the source code of the 2.0
 translation.

 That is actively working on the project, IMO.


 I have also spent ... time on events and meetings.

 That is actively working on the project, per the definition at the wiki
 page.


 Right now we are looking at the huge task of translation from version
 2, and I have to say, it is just too big, we need a smaller set of
 strings and an easier way to get members to contribute.

 To  be honest, a facebook app would be the best way to get people to
 contribute,

 Here is an interesting one - let's say that you did not actively work on
 translations (yet) and you have not started working at the booth in
 fairs and expos (yet..:) - but you started with your own initiative by
 creating a Facebook app, in fact let's pull that down a notch and say
 that you have started a FB fan page which is focused on LibreOffice, and
 you have dutifully worked that fan page for some period of time. ( let's
 say 6 months)

 Now you come and ask for membership - I would say that is probably not
 enough for me to agree, but it would be a factor I would consider, if
 you where doing other things also.

 Just some thoughts on that.

I am not asking for membership, I am stating what minimal things I
have done for OOO.
I am able to do coding etc, my role in this project for the albanian
language will be in recruiting members and finding funding or
motivation for the localization, until the point that we find someone
better to take over this.
My membership is with the flossk.org group that we founded in
promoting FLOSS in kosovo and one of the projects is the open office
localization, I see that libreoffice and tdf are going to be more
dynamic I hope or at least help make a difference.

If I get offered membership, I will hope that it is because I earned
it, and I am also able to cut code, but am already over committed on
things right now.

What we really need to do is come up with ideas on making libreoffice
smaller and more managable, and I think I can help with that.
you can see my lists of suggestions in some other mail.
thanks,
mike

--
E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org for instructions on how to 
unsubscribe
List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be 
deleted

Re: [tdf-discuss] [SC] How to define Membership within TDF?