Re: [tdf-discuss] How Close Is TDF...? [WAS Re: OpenOffice.org Apache Incubator Proposal: Splitting^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^HREUNITING the Community?]
On Jun 6, 2011, at 4:20 PM, Florian Effenberger wrote: Hi, Jim Jagielski wrote on 2011-06-06 22.13: Good to see the list... Not knowing things for sure, but I would guess that Oracle had issues with #3, which gave away (what I would expect to be) huge chunks of h/w infrastructure, esp to an entity which was still in the process (though close!) of finalizing its foundational status... your interpretation of #3 is wrong. It reads available for transfer, and emphasizes that by into The Document Foundation's infrastructure. There is not a single word about hardware wanted. Thx for the clarification... BTW, it also mentions integration with Oracle ERP and CRM stacks Did you really want (and expect) direct access to such incredibly sensitive and important parts of Oracle's business structure? How does that help the community? It seems much more something a competing business would want. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [tdf-discuss] How Close Is TDF...? [WAS Re: OpenOffice.org Apache Incubator Proposal: Splitting^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^HREUNITING the Community?]
Hello Jim, Le Tue, 7 Jun 2011 07:50:42 -0400, Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com a écrit : On Jun 6, 2011, at 4:20 PM, Florian Effenberger wrote: Hi, Jim Jagielski wrote on 2011-06-06 22.13: Good to see the list... Not knowing things for sure, but I would guess that Oracle had issues with #3, which gave away (what I would expect to be) huge chunks of h/w infrastructure, esp to an entity which was still in the process (though close!) of finalizing its foundational status... your interpretation of #3 is wrong. It reads available for transfer, and emphasizes that by into The Document Foundation's infrastructure. There is not a single word about hardware wanted. Thx for the clarification... BTW, it also mentions integration with Oracle ERP and CRM stacks Did you really want (and expect) direct access to such incredibly sensitive and important parts of Oracle's business structure? How does that help the community? It seems much more something a competing business would want. Actually it was felt that it's something Oracle would have enjoyed, as it simply eases major scale migrations to LibreOffice and reassures, on the other hand, customers who are studying acquiring Oracle solutions. Best, Charles. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: OpenOffice.org Apache Incubator Proposal: Splitting^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^HREUNITING the Community?
Florian, Yes, I see the licensing topic and that there are different views on that. However, I don't know if that requires to set-up all community efforts a second time. Simon posted one possible creative solution. Setting up a parallel project IMHO is wrong. -Can you help me to understand this Simon posted one possible creative solution? It seems the discussion is making progress. I like to think this is appropriate to be seen in Initial source files (was: OpenOffice: were are we now?) thread than here. -- Kevin
Re: OpenOffice.org Apache Incubator Proposal: Splitting^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^HREUNITING the Community?
Hi, Kevin Lau wrote on 2011-06-06 15.35: -Can you help me to understand this Simon posted one possible creative solution? It seems the discussion is making progress. I like to think this is appropriate to be seen in Initial source files (was: OpenOffice: were are we now?) thread than here. I referred to this one: http://www.mail-archive.com/general@incubator.apache.org/msg28006.html I am not saying this is my preferred choice, and this is by far not a TDF statement; I am saying that there are indeed creative ways to work together, rather than setting up two projects in parallel. Florian -- Florian Effenberger flo...@documentfoundation.org Steering Committee and Founding Member of The Document Foundation Tel: +49 8341 99660880 | Mobile: +49 151 14424108 Skype: floeff | Twitter/Identi.ca: @floeff - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: OpenOffice.org Apache Incubator Proposal: Splitting^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^HREUNITING the Community?
Hi Jim, all, 2011/6/4 Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com: On Jun 4, 2011, at 10:28 AM, Greg Stein wrote: Personally, I think Oracle's choice had more to do with IBM's recommendation, than taxes. I've been told that Oracle and TDF *were* in discussions but that the demands by TDF were sufficiently unpalatable to Oracle as to prevent any sort of agreement... IBM may have strongly suggested the ASF as a backup, but we were the runner-up in a sense. Taxes were not an issue... I do not see where the demands were unpalatable: http://blog.documentfoundation.org/2011/06/06/publishing-our-recommendation-to-oracle/ TDF just refused to pay for anything which is under contract of Oracle. Bye Volker -- Volker Merschmann Member of The Document Foundation http://www.documentfoundation.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: OpenOffice.org Apache Incubator Proposal: Splitting^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^HREUNITING the Community?
On Jun 6, 2011, at 3:55 PM, Volker Merschmann wrote: Hi Jim, all, 2011/6/4 Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com: On Jun 4, 2011, at 10:28 AM, Greg Stein wrote: Personally, I think Oracle's choice had more to do with IBM's recommendation, than taxes. I've been told that Oracle and TDF *were* in discussions but that the demands by TDF were sufficiently unpalatable to Oracle as to prevent any sort of agreement... IBM may have strongly suggested the ASF as a backup, but we were the runner-up in a sense. Taxes were not an issue... I do not see where the demands were unpalatable: http://blog.documentfoundation.org/2011/06/06/publishing-our-recommendation-to-oracle/ TDF just refused to pay for anything which is under contract of Oracle. Thx for the link. It is good to see TDF opening up regarding what their original request was to Oracle. Subsequent discussions, of course, are not known but so what. They are moot. For whatever reason, Oracle did not think that TDF was the right place. That ship has sailed. Time to figure out what to do now. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: OpenOffice.org Apache Incubator Proposal: Splitting^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^HREUNITING the Community?
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 9:08 PM, Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com wrote: On Jun 6, 2011, at 3:55 PM, Volker Merschmann wrote: Hi Jim, all, 2011/6/4 Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com: On Jun 4, 2011, at 10:28 AM, Greg Stein wrote: Personally, I think Oracle's choice had more to do with IBM's recommendation, than taxes. I've been told that Oracle and TDF *were* in discussions but that the demands by TDF were sufficiently unpalatable to Oracle as to prevent any sort of agreement... IBM may have strongly suggested the ASF as a backup, but we were the runner-up in a sense. Taxes were not an issue... I do not see where the demands were unpalatable: http://blog.documentfoundation.org/2011/06/06/publishing-our-recommendation-to-oracle/ TDF just refused to pay for anything which is under contract of Oracle. Thx for the link. It is good to see TDF opening up regarding what their original request was to Oracle. Subsequent discussions, of course, are not known but so what. They are moot. For whatever reason, Oracle did not think that TDF was the right place. That ship has sailed. Time to figure out what to do now. I asked, and apparently there were no subsequent discussions. But I agree, this ship has sailed and I'd be pleased to see this all move into a podlet...
RE: OpenOffice.org Apache Incubator Proposal: Splitting^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^HREUNITING the Community?
Volker Merschmann wrote: I've been told that Oracle and TDF *were* in discussions but that the demands by TDF were sufficiently unpalatable to Oracle as to prevent any sort of agreement... IBM may have strongly suggested the ASF as a backup, but we were the runner-up in a sense. Taxes were not an issue... I do not see where the demands were unpalatable: Well, We believe that the MPL (over say an Apache license) as a copy-left license, is crucial to community growth and acceptance, and has proved itself with Mozilla may not have been palatable. --- Noel - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: OpenOffice.org Apache Incubator Proposal: Splitting^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^HREUNITING the Community?
On Jun 6, 2011, at 4:11 PM, Simon Phipps wrote: On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 9:08 PM, Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com wrote: On Jun 6, 2011, at 3:55 PM, Volker Merschmann wrote: Hi Jim, all, 2011/6/4 Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com: On Jun 4, 2011, at 10:28 AM, Greg Stein wrote: Personally, I think Oracle's choice had more to do with IBM's recommendation, than taxes. I've been told that Oracle and TDF *were* in discussions but that the demands by TDF were sufficiently unpalatable to Oracle as to prevent any sort of agreement... IBM may have strongly suggested the ASF as a backup, but we were the runner-up in a sense. Taxes were not an issue... I do not see where the demands were unpalatable: http://blog.documentfoundation.org/2011/06/06/publishing-our-recommendation-to-oracle/ TDF just refused to pay for anything which is under contract of Oracle. Thx for the link. It is good to see TDF opening up regarding what their original request was to Oracle. Subsequent discussions, of course, are not known but so what. They are moot. For whatever reason, Oracle did not think that TDF was the right place. That ship has sailed. Time to figure out what to do now. I asked, and apparently there were no subsequent discussions. But I agree, this ship has sailed and I'd be pleased to see this all move into a podlet... I asked as well as was told otherwise... but again, it's moot. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: OpenOffice.org Apache Incubator Proposal: Splitting^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^HREUNITING the Community?
On Jun 6, 2011, at 4:12 PM, Noel J. Bergman wrote: Volker Merschmann wrote: I've been told that Oracle and TDF *were* in discussions but that the demands by TDF were sufficiently unpalatable to Oracle as to prevent any sort of agreement... IBM may have strongly suggested the ASF as a backup, but we were the runner-up in a sense. Taxes were not an issue... I do not see where the demands were unpalatable: Well, We believe that the MPL (over say an Apache license) as a copy-left license, is crucial to community growth and acceptance, and has proved itself with Mozilla may not have been palatable. I replied on the TDF ML about #3 which, from my reading (and from what I have been told by entities both within and outside of Oracle) requested the infrastructure which was later clarified to mean servers, various hardware, access to private Oracle infrastructure, etc... Which I also think Oracle would have balked at as well... Had TDF requested just #1 and #2, as well as a more liberal license, *maybe* things would have been different... but who knows. Those sorts of questions do more to retard progress than advance it... We are here... let's continue moving forward! Cheers! - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: OpenOffice.org Apache Incubator Proposal: Splitting^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^HREUNITING the Community?
Hi Jim, Jim Jagielski wrote on 2011-06-06 22.20: I replied on the TDF ML about #3 which, from my reading (and from what I have been told by entities both within and outside of Oracle) requested the infrastructure which was later clarified to mean servers, various hardware, access to private Oracle infrastructure, etc... Which I also think Oracle would have balked at as well... Had TDF requested just #1 and #2, as well as a more liberal license,*maybe* things would have been different... but who knows. Those sorts of questions do more to retard progress than advance it... We are here... let's continue moving forward! your interpretation of #3 is wrong. It reads available for transfer, and emphasizes that by into The Document Foundation's infrastructure. There is not a single word about hardware wanted. Being the person in charge of our infrastructure, together with our team, I confirm we would not have needed any additional hardware. We have all we need, everything works like a charm and we still have lots of space and resources free. Florian -- Florian Effenberger flo...@documentfoundation.org Steering Committee and Founding Member of The Document Foundation Tel: +49 8341 99660880 | Mobile: +49 151 14424108 Skype: floeff | Twitter/Identi.ca: @floeff - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: OpenOffice.org Apache Incubator Proposal: Splitting^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^HREUNITING the Community?
On Sat, Jun 4, 2011 at 3:38 PM, Florian Effenberger flo...@documentfoundation.org wrote: Hi, Greg Stein wrote on 2011-06-04 16.28: snip Personally, I think Oracle's choice had more to do with IBM's recommendation, than taxes. +1 I tend to agree. IMO it's all about governance. Non-profit foundations are constrained to act in certain ways. For example, it is hard for either the Apache or the Free Software Foundations to close source donated code. At least it would have not been impossible at all to work around that donation isuse, if there had been a will to do so. But I guess that should not be the topic of this thread. :-) Workarounds would have been possible but would have been slower and less certain to succeed. Donation to a existing non-profit foundation with an established governance model is a quick and sure way to get the code out from for-profit corporate control and to the community. Robert - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: OpenOffice.org Apache Incubator Proposal: Splitting^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^HREUNITING the Community?
Hi, Robert Burrell Donkin wrote on 2011-06-05 16.41: Non-profit foundations are constrained to act in certain ways. For example, it is hard for either the Apache or the Free Software Foundations to close source donated code. that's the same for a German-based foundation, and exactly the same for a German-based nonprofit association, which we currently have as legal entity. So, no difference at all, except for the location. :) The German association also is bound to their statutes and rules. Workarounds would have been possible but would have been slower and less certain to succeed. Donation to a existing non-profit foundation with an established governance model is a quick and sure way to get the code out from for-profit corporate control and to the community. That point has been repeaded over and over again, but basically you are saying everyone Do not set up your own foundation at all, we alreadyh have enough. Besides, the currently existing association has a governance model, is non-profit and donations are tax-deductible. So, I really don't see this as an issue, and I guess we would have had a similar discussion of the foundation was already in effect. ;) Florian -- Florian Effenberger flo...@documentfoundation.org Steering Committee and Founding Member of The Document Foundation Tel: +49 8341 99660880 | Mobile: +49 151 14424108 Skype: floeff | Twitter/Identi.ca: @floeff - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: OpenOffice.org Apache Incubator Proposal: Splitting^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^HREUNITING the Community?
On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 13:54, Florian Effenberger flo...@documentfoundation.org wrote: ... That point has been repeaded over and over again, but basically you are saying everyone Do not set up your own foundation at all, we alreadyh have enough. I don't know that Robert B-D said that, or anybody else. *I* certainly said it, and strongly believe it. But that's just me :-) Besides, the currently existing association has a governance model, is non-profit and donations are tax-deductible. Ah! I didn't know that the current sponsor enabled that. Good stuff. I had thought you were further away... Cheers, -g - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: OpenOffice.org Apache Incubator Proposal: Splitting^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^HREUNITING the Community?
On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 14:19, Florian Effenberger flo...@documentfoundation.org wrote: Hi, Greg Stein wrote on 2011-06-05 20.03: That point has been repeaded over and over again, but basically you are saying everyone Do not set up your own foundation at all, we alreadyh have enough. I don't know that Robert B-D said that, or anybody else. *I* certainly said it, and strongly believe it. But that's just me :-) so, why don't the ASF, the Mozilla Foundation, the Eclipse Foundation and the GNOME Foundation unite? :-) Different goals. I actually helped in setting up the Eclipse Foundation :-P (and the Python Software Foundation, for that matter) MoFo exists to own MoCo. Eclipse is a consortium, rather than a charity. So of the group, it would be GNOME and ASF that are most similar. Danese could probably speak to why GNOME Foundation was set up. I dunno, but I do think its duplication is sad... Sorry for the provocative question, I just wanted to state But we already have a foundation is no good argument for me. However, I think the point I wasn't trying to make that argument. Just a generic statement about open source groups thinking it is all cool to have their own foundation. It isn't. Far from it. Django... Drupal... this that and the other. ... This might not affect other topics, but honestly, I think the perception of what already is in existence is not clear enough for many parties on this list. :-) Hope I could shed some light on it... You very much did. Thank you! Cheers, -g - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: OpenOffice.org Apache Incubator Proposal: Splitting^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^HREUNITING the Community?
On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 7:03 PM, Greg Stein gst...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 13:54, Florian Effenberger flo...@documentfoundation.org wrote: ... That point has been repeaded over and over again, but basically you are saying everyone Do not set up your own foundation at all, we alreadyh have enough. (FWIW I aimed - but probably failing - to be much more nuanced) I don't know that Robert B-D said that, or anybody else. *I* certainly said it, and strongly believe it. But that's just me :-) I believe that setting up a new upstream Foundation to play with major corporations with a new governance model, IP system and legal framework is difficult and unrewarding work best avoided where possible. (It's a PITA. Given a choice, I would have preferred to spend much less of my life on it...) Given the donation to Apache, TDF could opt to focus on development downstream of the ASF cloning the well known GPLv3 distributed development model with copyright assigned to the FSF. Most problems (with major corporations players, IP or whatever) that the TDF community didn't want to handle right away could then be pushed upstream to the ASF or the FSF. Less risk and more freedom for the TDF. Besides, the currently existing association has a governance model, is non-profit and donations are tax-deductible. Ah! I didn't know that the current sponsor enabled that. Good stuff. +1 I had thought you were further away... That's the impression I had from an early post here as well... Robert - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: OpenOffice.org Apache Incubator Proposal: Splitting^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^HREUNITING the Community?
On Jun 5, 2011, at 4:22 PM, Robert Burrell Donkin wrote: I had thought you were further away... That's the impression I had from an early post here as well... Please see: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/msg01027.html - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: OpenOffice.org Apache Incubator Proposal: Splitting^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^HREUNITING the Community?
Hi, Jim Jagielski wrote on 2011-06-05 22.26: That's the impression I had from an early post here as well... Please see: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/msg01027.html if you want to get a good overview on the progress, here are a few (though lenghty) blog postings that might help: http://blog.documentfoundation.org/2011/05/24/updates-on-the-foundation/ http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/msg00923.html http://blog.documentfoundation.org/2011/04/20/status-quo-on-the-foundation-part-ii/ http://blog.documentfoundation.org/2011/03/18/status-quo-on-the-foundation/ Florian -- Florian Effenberger flo...@documentfoundation.org Steering Committee and Founding Member of The Document Foundation Tel: +49 8341 99660880 | Mobile: +49 151 14424108 Skype: floeff | Twitter/Identi.ca: @floeff - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: OpenOffice.org Apache Incubator Proposal: Splitting^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^HREUNITING the Community?
Hi Robert, I'm still reading a few messages and trying to reply to them, but wanted to join in here: Robert Burrell Donkin wrote on 2011-06-04 09.14: The TDF is in no position to accept a major donation of either copyright or code today. Apache is. Why? Can you elaborate? Florian -- Florian Effenberger flo...@documentfoundation.org Steering Committee and Founding Member of The Document Foundation Tel: +49 8341 99660880 | Mobile: +49 151 14424108 Skype: floeff | Twitter/Identi.ca: @floeff - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: OpenOffice.org Apache Incubator Proposal: Splitting^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^HREUNITING the Community?
On Sat, Jun 4, 2011 at 11:13 AM, Florian Effenberger flo...@documentfoundation.org wrote: Hi Robert, Hi Florian (Copying in Charles since he asked a similar question off list) I'm still reading a few messages and trying to reply to them, but wanted to join in here: Just like the rest of us :-) Noisy and open - everyone with an opinion is welcome :-) Robert Burrell Donkin wrote on 2011-06-04 09.14: The TDF is in no position to accept a major donation of either copyright or code today. Apache is. Why? AIUI [1] the TDF is not a legal entity today and is still in the process of building it's legal, organisational and process infrastructure. I accept it has strong legal backing but today no (related) US non-profit corporation exists which could accept the donation. The Apache Software Foundation provides a suitable legal no-profit organisation and in place today a suitable process to accept large donations of code from major organisations safely through the Incubator. It has considerable experience of opening close source projects and in working with rich downstream ecologies. Can you elaborate? IMHO LibreOffice community finds itself in a similar position to the Apache group in the mid-90s. Great community. Fantastic momentum. Cool product. But establishing code provenance and the Apache Software Foundation (ASF) took a(n unexpectedly) large amount of time and energy. Establishing suitable licenses and agreements took time and energy over several iterations. Establishing a sound Incubation process took time and energy over many iterations. It took time for us to learn and evolve secure processes which don't completely suck. The TDF is at the start of a journey that the ASF started a decade ago and is yet to reach the end. The TDF may wish to consider whether an alternative path might achieve their aims faster... Robert [1] http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-general/201106.mbox/%3CBANLkTi=ay5pm-xvcvbxxjwj0eqqqpww...@mail.gmail.com%3E - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: OpenOffice.org Apache Incubator Proposal: Splitting^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^HREUNITING the Community?
Hello Robert, 2011/6/4 Robert Burrell Donkin robertburrelldon...@gmail.com On Sat, Jun 4, 2011 at 11:13 AM, Florian Effenberger flo...@documentfoundation.org wrote: Hi Robert, Hi Florian (Copying in Charles since he asked a similar question off list) Did I send you a reply off-list? Damned phone... I'm still reading a few messages and trying to reply to them, but wanted to join in here: Just like the rest of us :-) Noisy and open - everyone with an opinion is welcome :-) Robert Burrell Donkin wrote on 2011-06-04 09.14: The TDF is in no position to accept a major donation of either copyright or code today. Apache is. Why? AIUI [1] the TDF is not a legal entity today and is still in the process of building it's legal, organisational and process infrastructure. I accept it has strong legal backing but today no (related) US non-profit corporation exists which could accept the donation. 2 comments here: 1) actually TDF has an existing legal entity at its core, and it's a german association. 2) why a US non profit? The Apache Software Foundation provides a suitable legal no-profit organisation and in place today a suitable process to accept large donations of code from major organisations safely through the Incubator. It has considerable experience of opening close source projects and in working with rich downstream ecologies. Can you elaborate? IMHO LibreOffice community finds itself in a similar position to the Apache group in the mid-90s. Great community. Fantastic momentum. Cool product. But establishing code provenance and the Apache Software Foundation (ASF) took a(n unexpectedly) large amount of time and energy. Establishing suitable licenses and agreements took time and energy over several iterations. Establishing a sound Incubation process took time and energy over many iterations. It took time for us to learn and evolve secure processes which don't completely suck. The TDF is at the start of a journey that the ASF started a decade ago and is yet to reach the end. The TDF may wish to consider whether an alternative path might achieve their aims faster... We have been developing our governance and structure for 8 months. People have put their trust and their faith in us. Why would you want us to scrap that off in favor of something else and have people follow a governance they don't even know? Best, Charles. Robert [1] http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-general/201106.mbox/%3CBANLkTi=ay5pm-xvcvbxxjwj0eqqqpww...@mail.gmail.com%3E
Re: OpenOffice.org Apache Incubator Proposal: Splitting^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^HREUNITING the Community?
Hi, On 04/06/2011 16:03, Charles-H. Schulz wrote: Hello Robert, 2011/6/4 Robert Burrell Donkinrobertburrelldon...@gmail.com [...] The TDF is at the start of a journey that the ASF started a decade ago and is yet to reach the end. The TDF may wish to consider whether an alternative path might achieve their aims faster... We have been developing our governance and structure for 8 months. People have put their trust and their faith in us. Why would you want us to scrap that off in favor of something else and have people follow a governance they don't even know? This development of our governance and structure is also the result of 10 years of project and community life, working together and elaborating our rules and processes, having a deep knowledge of the ecosystem and of our user base. The TDF is born from this analyze and is the maturation of this community, this is why we see it unified even when creating the foundation. Kind regards Sophie Best, Charles. Robert [1] http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-general/201106.mbox/%3CBANLkTi=ay5pm-xvcvbxxjwj0eqqqpww...@mail.gmail.com%3E -- Founding member of The Document Foundation - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: OpenOffice.org Apache Incubator Proposal: Splitting^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^HREUNITING the Community?
On Saturday, June 4, 2011, Florian Effenberger flo...@documentfoundation.org wrote: Hi Robert, I'm still reading a few messages and trying to reply to them, but wanted to join in here: Robert Burrell Donkin wrote on 2011-06-04 09.14: The TDF is in no position to accept a major donation of either copyright or code today. Apache is. Why? Can you elaborate? In short : taxes (US taxes) saving donnating stuff to non profit org. Julien - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: OpenOffice.org Apache Incubator Proposal: Splitting^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^HREUNITING the Community?
Hi, Julien Vermillard wrote on 2011-06-04 16.05: In short : taxes (US taxes) saving donnating stuff to non profit org. where is this different from a German entity where donations are tax-deductible, like with the current association (which is even accredited as especially meritorious by the tax department), or the foundation currently created? Florian -- Florian Effenberger flo...@documentfoundation.org Steering Committee and Founding Member of The Document Foundation Tel: +49 8341 99660880 | Mobile: +49 151 14424108 Skype: floeff | Twitter/Identi.ca: @floeff - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: OpenOffice.org Apache Incubator Proposal: Splitting^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^HREUNITING the Community?
On Jun 4, 2011 10:08 AM, Florian Effenberger flo...@documentfoundation.org wrote: Hi, Julien Vermillard wrote on 2011-06-04 16.05: In short : taxes (US taxes) saving donnating stuff to non profit org. where is this different from a German entity where donations are tax-deductible, like with the current association (which is even accredited as especially meritorious by the tax department), or the foundation currently created? Oracle America is the full name of the entity that granted us the code. They may not have been able to get the same tax deduction donating to a foreign entity. The tax deduction would be *considerable* given the value of the OOo brand. Personally, I think Oracle's choice had more to do with IBM's recommendation, than taxes. Cheers, -g
Re: OpenOffice.org Apache Incubator Proposal: Splitting^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^HREUNITING the Community?
Hi, Greg Stein wrote on 2011-06-04 16.28: Oracle America is the full name of the entity that granted us the code. They may not have been able to get the same tax deduction donating to a foreign entity. The tax deduction would be*considerable* given the value of the OOo brand. ah, sorry, then I understood this wrong - I understood the mail in a way that in general, an US-based solution would be better. Of course, for US-based entitites, a US foundation has advantages, whereas for European-based entities, an European foundation has advantages. What I wanted to point out is that in any way, a solution has to be found for those not located in the legislative of the foundation, so ASF and TDF have the same issues here to solve. Personally, I think Oracle's choice had more to do with IBM's recommendation, than taxes. I tend to agree. At least it would have not been impossible at all to work around that donation isuse, if there had been a will to do so. But I guess that should not be the topic of this thread. :-) More on the other mails later on, Florian -- Florian Effenberger flo...@documentfoundation.org Steering Committee and Founding Member of The Document Foundation Tel: +49 8341 99660880 | Mobile: +49 151 14424108 Skype: floeff | Twitter/Identi.ca: @floeff - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: OpenOffice.org Apache Incubator Proposal: Splitting^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^HREUNITING the Community?
On Jun 4, 2011, at 10:28 AM, Greg Stein wrote: Personally, I think Oracle's choice had more to do with IBM's recommendation, than taxes. I've been told that Oracle and TDF *were* in discussions but that the demands by TDF were sufficiently unpalatable to Oracle as to prevent any sort of agreement... IBM may have strongly suggested the ASF as a backup, but we were the runner-up in a sense. Taxes were not an issue... - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: OpenOffice.org Apache Incubator Proposal: Splitting^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^HREUNITING the Community?
On Jun 4, 2011, at 9:03 AM, Charles-H. Schulz wrote: We have been developing our governance and structure for 8 months. People have put their trust and their faith in us. Why would you want us to scrap that off in favor of something else and have people follow a governance they don't even know? How can one respond to the question (and the original one that predicated this one) without someone misinterpreting it as confrontational, self-serving or condescending? One issue that was, from all I have been told and heard, is that having OOo at some place with a known track record, with real FOSS street cred and the ability to work with other FOSS organizations as well as commercial entities was important. That it wasn't just getting rid of OOo but instead placing it someplace where it had the best chance to growth, thrive and prosper. I've also been told that Oracle and TDF did discuss moving OOo there, but that in addition to some requirements that were unacceptable, that TDF was still a foundation-in-creation. Reading over the blogs, it is even admitted that the complexity and time involved in creating one was underestimated. The concern was putting the life and longevity of OOo into, basically, an unknown quantity. With that in mind, the ASF (or Eclipse) is much different. We've been a foundation since 1999, and an active force since 1994. We have a legal structure, a non-profit 501(c)3 status, existing infrastructure, a healthy fundraising effort, a methodology and governance model that is copied and well respected, and a proven track record of building exceptional FOSS projects and communities. There are *obvious* things that, with OOo in mind, the ASF lacks that TDF has in spades: the build and distribution system is the one which has been mentioned most of all. There are things that the TDF lacks that the ASF has in spades. I don't see why we can't work together to use each other to fill in the holes that the other lacks. P.S. I am again reminded by people (privately, in order to keep the noise down a bit) that although TDF is a major player in the OOo space, it is not just the ASF and TDF, but *everyone*. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: OpenOffice.org Apache Incubator Proposal: Splitting^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^HREUNITING the Community?
Hello Jim, 2011/6/4 Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com On Jun 4, 2011, at 9:03 AM, Charles-H. Schulz wrote: We have been developing our governance and structure for 8 months. People have put their trust and their faith in us. Why would you want us to scrap that off in favor of something else and have people follow a governance they don't even know? How can one respond to the question (and the original one that predicated this one) without someone misinterpreting it as confrontational, self-serving or condescending? One issue that was, from all I have been told and heard, is that having OOo at some place with a known track record, with real FOSS street cred and the ability to work with other FOSS organizations as well as commercial entities was important. That it wasn't just getting rid of OOo but instead placing it someplace where it had the best chance to growth, thrive and prosper. I've also been told that Oracle and TDF did discuss moving OOo there, but that in addition to some requirements that were unacceptable, that TDF was still a foundation-in-creation. Reading over the blogs, it is even admitted that the complexity and time involved in creating one was underestimated. The concern was putting the life and longevity of OOo into, basically, an unknown quantity. I would be very wary of this sort of assertion, regardless of the person who made it, Jim. TDF does have quite an interesting story on this but we naively felt that discussions that were clearly off the record were to be kept, well, off the record. But then if everybody else comes up with his own version it might be necessary for TDF to bring its own version to the table. With that in mind, the ASF (or Eclipse) is much different. We've been a foundation since 1999, and an active force since 1994. We have a legal structure, a non-profit 501(c)3 status, existing infrastructure, a healthy fundraising effort, a methodology and governance model that is copied and well respected, and a proven track record of building exceptional FOSS projects and communities. There are *obvious* things that, with OOo in mind, the ASF lacks that TDF has in spades: the build and distribution system is the one which has been mentioned most of all. There are things that the TDF lacks that the ASF has in spades. I don't see why we can't work together to use each other to fill in the holes that the other lacks. I think I have expressed myself -and so did TDF- on our interest to work with ASF. We are discussing terms, and also how the general discussion is framed. But this being said I also do feel we're making progress, aren't we? P.S. I am again reminded by people (privately, in order to keep the noise down a bit) that although TDF is a major player in the OOo space, it is not just the ASF and TDF, but *everyone*. I would rephrase this in a different way. This is Free Sofware, TDF's mission is to replace the OOo space with the LibreOffice space, and yes there are other players, but I feel that's somewhat obvious. :) Best, Charles.; - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: OpenOffice.org Apache Incubator Proposal: Splitting^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^HREUNITING the Community?
On Jun 4, 2011, at 2:38 PM, Charles-H. Schulz wrote: I would be very wary of this sort of assertion, regardless of the person who made it, Jim. TDF does have quite an interesting story on this but we naively felt that discussions that were clearly off the record were to be kept, well, off the record. But then if everybody else comes up with his own version it might be necessary for TDF to bring its own version to the table. Sorry... I didn't mean to open a can of worms. What I wanted to do was ensure that people knew that there were discussions between TDF and Oracle (and Oracle/IBM) and that asking the ASF what's wrong with TDF or why Oracle/IBM didn't give it to us is both asking the wrong person as well as asking for heresay. It's just important for the people from the ASF side who do not know the history, and may be asking Why didn't Oracle/IBM chat w/ TDF to know that it *did* happen. I think I have expressed myself -and so did TDF- on our interest to work with ASF. We are discussing terms, and also how the general discussion is framed. But this being said I also do feel we're making progress, aren't we? I think we are, yes, and it's a great feeling... P.S. I am again reminded by people (privately, in order to keep the noise down a bit) that although TDF is a major player in the OOo space, it is not just the ASF and TDF, but *everyone*. I would rephrase this in a different way. This is Free Sofware, TDF's mission is to replace the OOo space with the LibreOffice space, and yes there are other players, but I feel that's somewhat obvious. :) By point is that the Apache podling proposal is about OpenOffice.org, the entire community, and so while we need to ensure open lines of communication and collaboration and cooperation between the ASF and TDF, we (the ASF) must also ensure that other members of the OOo community and eco-system feel just as important to the discussion and the events. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
RE: OpenOffice.org Apache Incubator Proposal: Splitting^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^HREUNITING the Community?
First off, as we've seen with other projects that have gone through Incubation, we have not chosen to avoid areas where others have projects. Simply put, if there is interest from a community, we seek to be supportive. If this proposal goes through, and the ASF chooses to incubate OO.o, everyone will be welcomed. The TDF, individually or en masse, can consider whether or not to join the project. If there is a community split, that decision will rest solely on those who choose not to join our all-inclusive environment. Personally, I would wholeheartedly welcome the TDF joining in on the project. This need not be a miss opportunity to re-unite; it is STILL an opportunity to reunite. --- Noel - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: OpenOffice.org Apache Incubator Proposal: Splitting^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^HREUNITING the Community?
Hello, as we have a public holiday in Germany, I will reply to the other messages tomorrow. However, I cannot leave this sentence uncommented: Noel J. Bergman wrote on 2011-06-02 20.50: If there is a community split, that decision will rest solely on those who choose not to join our all-inclusive environment. So, if TDF does not join the Apache OOo project, a community split is our (=TDF) fault. However, if the people proposing the Apache incubator project do not join TDF, a community split is not their fault. This looks like a rather one-sided view to me. Florian -- Florian Effenberger flo...@documentfoundation.org Steering Committee and Founding Member of The Document Foundation Tel: +49 8341 99660880 | Mobile: +49 151 14424108 Skype: floeff | Twitter/Identi.ca: @floeff - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: OpenOffice.org Apache Incubator Proposal: Splitting^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^HREUNITING the Community?
Hi Florian So, if TDF does not join the Apache OOo project, a community split is our (=TDF) fault. However, if the people proposing the Apache incubator project do not join TDF, a community split is not their fault. Noel wants surely express OOo is open to everybody and there is no intention to split anything. Lets not speak about faults or anything. It is even possible that both communities can benefit from each other. Whatever, its not about faults imho. Not the TDF joins Apache, Individuals do This looks like a rather one-sided view to me. If the proposal does not go through, we miss the chance to have an ASL licensed office suite. This is important for some (me included). If Apache refuses, its the fault of the ASF do let this chance go and leave Office suites to the world of GPL. This is the other side. Florian -- Florian Effenberger flo...@documentfoundation.org Steering Committee and Founding Member of The Document Foundation Tel: +49 8341 99660880 | Mobile: +49 151 14424108 Skype: floeff | Twitter/Identi.ca: @floeff - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org -- http://www.grobmeier.de - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: OpenOffice.org Apache Incubator Proposal: Splitting^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^HREUNITING the Community?
On Jun 2, 2011, at 3:01 PM, Florian Effenberger wrote: Noel J. Bergman wrote on 2011-06-02 20.50: If there is a community split, that decision will rest solely on those who choose not to join our all-inclusive environment. So, if TDF does not join the Apache OOo project, a community split is our (=TDF) fault. However, if the people proposing the Apache incubator project do not join TDF, a community split is not their fault. This looks like a rather one-sided view to me. What's up with the adversarial tone that the conversation has assumed? And so quickly, too. Surely a major goal should be to discussion how to reunite the community (and the code base) rather than deepening the rift that was artificially imposed on the community. -- Rich Bowen rbo...@rcbowen.com rbo...@apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: OpenOffice.org Apache Incubator Proposal: Splitting^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^HREUNITING the Community?
Florian Effenberger flo...@documentfoundation.org wrote on 06/02/2011 03:01:26 PM: Hello, as we have a public holiday in Germany, I will reply to the other messages tomorrow. However, I cannot leave this sentence uncommented: Noel J. Bergman wrote on 2011-06-02 20.50: If there is a community split, that decision will rest solely on those who choose not to join our all-inclusive environment. So, if TDF does not join the Apache OOo project, a community split is our (=TDF) fault. However, if the people proposing the Apache incubator project do not join TDF, a community split is not their fault. This looks like a rather one-sided view to me. If I may make a quick observation. We're spinning around on words here. That is not useful. The word community is being used in two different senses, and this equivocation is wasting a lot of time on this list. Let me just spell it out explicitly and maybe we can avoid wasting more time on it: Community (sense 1): Any specific existing group of people who are members of an actual open source project. Community (sense 2): An aspirational vision of a group of people whom someone thinks ought to be working together on a specific open source project. I don't think that anyone can argue that Apache OpenOffice would, in any active sense, split an existing community, in sense 1. Sense 2 is a but more subjective, since each person might have their own vision of what the ideal community would look like. To some Apache OpenOffice would be bringing that community together. To another person, with a different vision, it might be splitting it. But I suggest that using a violent term like split and to accuse others of doing it, but then to have it applied to an idealized vision of a community that does not exist today, that is a rhetorical device best omitted. An alternative way of expressing it, in a more natural fashion, might be: (and not to put words in Florian's mouth) I have a vision of a unified community in LibreOffice but this future unity cannot be achieved if there exits others who are contributing to a different community. -Rob - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: OpenOffice.org Apache Incubator Proposal: Splitting^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^HREUNITING the Community?
On Jun 2, 2011, at 3:34 PM, robert_w...@us.ibm.com wrote: Sense 2 is a but more subjective, since each person might have their own vision of what the ideal community would look like. Let's look at it this way: Pretend that when things starting going south in OOo, but before TDF was formed, Oracle had done what it just did: donate the code and the trademark to the ASF. If that had happened, would those of you behind TDF still have created it? This is, I think, an important question, and an honest answer would get to any real underlying issues, imo. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: OpenOffice.org Apache Incubator Proposal: Splitting^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^HREUNITING the Community?
Jim, 2011/6/2 Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com On Jun 2, 2011, at 3:34 PM, robert_w...@us.ibm.com wrote: Sense 2 is a but more subjective, since each person might have their own vision of what the ideal community would look like. Let's look at it this way: Pretend that when things starting going south in OOo, but before TDF was formed, Oracle had done what it just did: donate the code and the trademark to the ASF. If that had happened, would those of you behind TDF still have created it? This is, I think, an important question, and an honest answer would get to any real underlying issues, imo. That's a tough one, Jim :-) I can't speak for everyone else at TDF and everyone else in general on this. My honest guess is that TDF would not have had the momentum it has today. For a more complete answer I think we would need to ponder how the final status of the project inside Apache would have been/would be, how the project structure and goals, as well as development processes would have been defined, etc. In a nutshell, I think that in the absence of any alternative, OpenOffice inside Apache would have made people happy in the sense that it would have been twenty times better than what was happening with the old OpenOffice project. Yet many difficulties would have existed (copyleft, non-copyleft being one of the major issues). But what this highlights imho, is that yesterday's announcement comes out for many as something that does not make sense, at least chronologically speaking. In French we use an expression that goes a bit like a hairball that landed in the soup; I'm certainly not comparing ASF to a hairball nor soup :-) but you get the idea. Worse, perhaps, is the growing impression that something has gone wrong or didn't work the right way between the major proponent of an OpenOffice project inside the Apache foundation, IBM, and TDF. At least that's my feeling. I understand IBM has business and strategic requirements, my personal feeling (I'm not speaking on behalf of TDF on this one) is that we didn't have enough time/opportunity to understand each other more. And now, we are looking at a hairball that just landed in the soup. Let's see how we can deal with this in a constructive way. Best, Charles. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: OpenOffice.org Apache Incubator Proposal: Splitting^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^HREUNITING the Community?
On Jun 2, 2011, at 4:03 PM, Charles-H. Schulz wrote: That's a tough one, Jim :-) It's what I do :) my personal feeling (I'm not speaking on behalf of TDF on this one) is that we didn't have enough time/opportunity to understand each other more. And now, we are looking at a hairball that just landed in the soup. Let's see how we can deal with this in a constructive way. ++1 - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
RE: OpenOffice.org Apache Incubator Proposal: Splitting^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^HREUNITING the Community?
Florian Effenberger wrote: Noel J. Bergman wrote: If there is a community split, that decision will rest solely on those who choose not to join our all-inclusive environment. So, if TDF does not join the Apache OOo project, a community split is our (=TDF) fault. However, if the people proposing the Apache incubator project do not join TDF, a community split is not their fault. This looks like a rather one-sided view to me. Look on the positive side, and realize that this is a huge opportunity to reunite the community. That's how *I* choose to view it. That is how Jim, Jukka and Andreas also appear to view it. Charles Schulz also seems to concur that were OO.o's transfer to the ASF have happened right off the bat, we wouldn't be debating the point. I'm sure that we're not alone, despite the fact that we all might wish that this had happened long ago. Charles says that he doesn't want to enter a debate on licensing. But licensing is an elephant in the room. Oracle's move with OO.o will fully open the project to all participants and use-cases, including those who might previously have had to enter into alternate, paid, licensing arrangements with the copyright holder. --- Noel - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: OpenOffice.org Apache Incubator Proposal: Splitting^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^HREUNITING the Community?
Hello Noel, 2011/6/2 Noel J. Bergman n...@devtech.com Florian Effenberger wrote: Noel J. Bergman wrote: If there is a community split, that decision will rest solely on those who choose not to join our all-inclusive environment. So, if TDF does not join the Apache OOo project, a community split is our (=TDF) fault. However, if the people proposing the Apache incubator project do not join TDF, a community split is not their fault. This looks like a rather one-sided view to me. Look on the positive side, and realize that this is a huge opportunity to reunite the community. That's how *I* choose to view it. That is how Jim, Jukka and Andreas also appear to view it. Charles Schulz also seems to concur that were OO.o's transfer to the ASF have happened right off the bat, we wouldn't be debating the point. I'm sure that we're not alone, despite the fact that we all might wish that this had happened long ago. You misunderstood me, I think: I'm saying that in the real world, LibreOffice has happened and that Openoffice being given to Apache is odd and not the best thing that could have happened. Charles says that he doesn't want to enter a debate on licensing. But licensing is an elephant in the room. Oracle's move with OO.o will fully open the project to all participants and use-cases, including those who might previously have had to enter into alternate, paid, licensing arrangements with the copyright holder. And it comes with arrangements that create issues. Best, Charles. --- Noel - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
RE: OpenOffice.org Apache Incubator Proposal: Splitting^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^HREUNITING the Community?
Charles H. Schulz wrote: Noel J. Bergman wrote: Oracle's move with OO.o will fully open the project to all participants and use-cases, including those who might previously have had to enter into alternate, paid, licensing arrangements with the copyright holder. And it comes with arrangements that create issues. Elaborate, please. :-) --- Noel - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: OpenOffice.org Apache Incubator Proposal: Splitting^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^HREUNITING the Community?
On 2 June 2011 21:22, Noel J. Bergman n...@devtech.com wrote: Florian Effenberger wrote: Noel J. Bergman wrote: If there is a community split, that decision will rest solely on those who choose not to join our all-inclusive environment. So, if TDF does not join the Apache OOo project, a community split is our (=TDF) fault. However, if the people proposing the Apache incubator project do not join TDF, a community split is not their fault. This looks like a rather one-sided view to me Charles says that he doesn't want to enter a debate on licensing. But licensing is an elephant in the room. Oracle's move with OO.o will fully open the project to all participants and use-cases, including those who might previously have had to enter into alternate, paid, licensing arrangements with the copyright holder. Emotionally, ownership (in its broadest sense) is a factor but if we put that aside for a minute, the only real issue *is* licensing. If there was complete agreement on licensing why would there be a need for more than one project? If a developer is totally committed to a copyleft license they might prefer to contribute to a copyleft licensed product development and same for a developer that wants a more permissive license the other way. If you are not bothered either way it won't matter. So the only other practical consideration is whether Apache OOo will get sufficient support. There are 9 names on the commit list which seems surprisingly few to me but maybe everyone is just waiting to see what happens. I'm wondering whether the document foundation could not as its name suggests become more about odf as a format? I helped start the OpenDocument Fellowship with that in mind so I think there is a need. LibreOffice could be a copyleft licensed version of the more liberally licensed Apache code. So on that model all stays much the same but with agreed cooperation to get the best out of it. Main long term problem I see is a potential divergence of the code due to the different licenses but I can't see how that risk can be avoided in the circumstances. --- Noel - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org -- Ian Ofqual Accredited IT Qualifications The Schools ITQ www.theINGOTs.org +44 (0)1827 305940 You have received this email from the following company: The Learning Machine Limited, Reg Office, 36 Ashby Road, Tamworth, Staffordshire, B79 8AQ. Reg No: 05560797, Registered in England and Wales.
Re: OpenOffice.org Apache Incubator Proposal: Splitting^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^HREUNITING the Community?
This whole topic seems to suffer from malformed or uninformative subject lines. I submit that it's not the purview of the ASF or the Incubator PMC to achieve world peace, or whirled peas, or a single project for open source document software. Oracle has granted code to the ASF. A group of people have made a proposal to launch a podling based on that granted code. The incubator has criteria for judging proposals. They relate to the probability of the successful creation of a self-sustaining Apache project. The existing of TDF and the preference of its contributors for copyleft is data, but for me it's not data that could persuade me to vote -1 in this PMC. I don't care if there are 5,000 people out there who are firmly planning to stick to TDF like glue. I care if there are 10 or 20 who are prepared to take this on. Personally, I also prefer to be lenient about launching podlings and then strict about noticing when they are failing to hatch. I am sympathetic to those TDF contributors for whom this development arrives as an unwelcome surprise and perhaps a cheap parthian shot from Oracle and IBM. However, as a member of the ASF and the incubator PMC, my sympathy does not extend to voting against this proposal on criteria related to the possible damage to TDF/LO or the success or failure of some attempt treat this as 'the one and only' successor to the Sun's open office. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: OpenOffice.org Apache Incubator Proposal: Splitting^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^HREUNITING the Community?
On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 5:42 PM, Benson Margulies bimargul...@gmail.comwrote: This whole topic seems to suffer from malformed or uninformative subject lines. I submit that it's not the purview of the ASF or the Incubator PMC to achieve world peace, or whirled peas, or a single project for open source document software. Oracle has granted code to the ASF. A group of people have made a proposal to launch a podling based on that granted code. The incubator has criteria for judging proposals. They relate to the probability of the successful creation of a self-sustaining Apache project. The existing of TDF and the preference of its contributors for copyleft is data, but for me it's not data that could persuade me to vote -1 in this PMC. I don't care if there are 5,000 people out there who are firmly planning to stick to TDF like glue. I care if there are 10 or 20 who are prepared to take this on. +1 Phil
Re: OpenOffice.org Apache Incubator Proposal: Splitting^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^HREUNITING the Community?
On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 5:50 PM, Ian Lynch ianrly...@gmail.com wrote: On 2 June 2011 22:42, Benson Margulies bimargul...@gmail.com wrote: The existing of TDF and the preference of its contributors for copyleft is data, but for me it's not data that could persuade me to vote -1 in this PMC. I don't care if there are 5,000 people out there who are firmly planning to stick to TDF like glue. I care if there are 10 or 20 who are prepared to take this on. But you probably make it more likely that you will get your 10-20 and more if you don't unnecessarily alienate those who have put a lot of time and effort into OOo in the past. In addition, if we want a thriving open source office project it makes sense to treat those involved with some sensitivity because hopefully everyone will work together constructively in the future. True, but there are very strict and simple limits to what the ASF can and can't do. It can't host a copyleft project. It can't hire a cyborg and a time machine. We have the code, and we have our process. We can be polite, but it is very important for everyone involved to understand that we cannot, in my opinion, do copyleft, nor can we shut the door in the face of a legitimate proposal, even one that disturbs many people who have worked on this code in the past. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
