To expand and clarify on Mark's excellent points:
Mark Thomas wrote earlier:
> On 2016-09-06 17:06 (+0100), Simos Xenitellis
> wrote:
>
> Just responding to these specific bits with my Apache Brand
> Management Committee member hat on.
>
>> which claims that the Apache Foundation has the Apach
Le 07/09/2016 à 16:55, Dennis E. Hamilton a écrit :
3. I suspect that discussions about available software alternatives would arise
on users@oo.a.o and particularly on the Community Forums. That would happen
naturally without requiring the project to take any positions or provide any
kind of e
wing websites,
http://pub-db.com/google-analytics/UA-19309218.html
Simos
> - Dennis
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Mark Thomas [mailto:ma...@apache.org]
>> Sent: Thursday, September 8, 2016 02:08
>> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: [D
t: Re: [DISCUSS] What Would OpenOffice Retirement Involve? (long)
>
> On 2016-09-06 17:06 (+0100), Simos Xenitellis
> wrote:
>
> Just responding to these specific bits with my Apache Brand Management
> Committee member hat on.
>
> > which claims that the Apache Fou
Am 08.09.2016 um 12:39 schrieb Jose R R:
>
> Just as when former HP CEO, Léo Apotheker, masturbated in public about
> selling the PC business, damage has already been done:
> http://www.networkworld.com/article/3117144/open-source-tools/openoffice-may-be-fading-into-the-sunset.html
> http://arste
Am 08.09.2016 um 14:21 schrieb Dr. Michael Stehmann:
>
> There are two articles on german technical and Free Software news
> portals and regarding to the comments they also got a lot of attention.
>
Sorry, it was uncomplete:
There are two articles on german technical and Free Software news
por
Fine then. I'll drop it. It did deserve to be brought up though.
> On Sep 7, 2016, at 5:35 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
>
> On 06/09/2016 Jim Jagielski wrote:
>> What has been obvious, from following the numerous threads in various
>> places, as well as contributing to the 2 main ones, is just how
On Thu, Sep 1, 2016 at 4:37 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
>
> Here is what a careful retirement of Apache OpenOffice could look like.
>
> A. PERSPECTIVE
> B. WHAT RETIREMENT COULD LOOK LIKE
> 1. Code Base
> 2. Downloads
>
On 2016-09-06 17:06 (+0100), Simos Xenitellis
wrote:
Just responding to these specific bits with my Apache Brand Management
Committee member hat on.
> which claims that the Apache Foundation has the Apache OpenOffice⢠and
> OpenOffice.org®.
> However, my search at the US Trademark database
Am 09/07/2016 11:35 PM, schrieb Andrea Pescetti:
On 06/09/2016 Jim Jagielski wrote:
What has been obvious, from following the numerous threads in various
places, as well as contributing to the 2 main ones, is just how much
"damage" Rob Weir has either done or has been attributed to have done.
On 06/09/2016 Jim Jagielski wrote:
What has been obvious, from following the numerous threads in various
places, as well as contributing to the 2 main ones, is just how much
"damage" Rob Weir has either done or has been attributed to have done.
There is no relation whatsoever between Rob Weir a
Am 09/07/2016 10:53 PM, schrieb Andrea Pescetti:
Dave Fisher wrote:
I think that the appropriate place to keep this plan in whatever state
it will be kept is on one of our wikis.
Not without an appropriate disclaimer saying that this is not a
determined course of action, but merely a descripti
Hello imacat,
> From: imacat [mailto:ima...@mail.imacat.idv.tw]
> I see. Thanks, Jörg, Andrea.
>
> I'm working on two OpenOffice tools and may announce their beta
> release in one or two weeks. I was stunned by the news, but
> am happy to
> see it is quite different from what the pre
Dave Fisher wrote:
I think that the appropriate place to keep this plan in whatever state it will
be kept is on one of our wikis.
Not without an appropriate disclaimer saying that this is not a
determined course of action, but merely a description of steps that
would have to be taken in the,
> -Original Message-
> From: Dave Fisher [mailto:dave2w...@comcast.net]
> Sent: Wednesday, September 7, 2016 10:23
> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] What Would OpenOffice Retirement Involve? (long)
>
> Hi Dennis,
>
> I think that th
is E. Hamilton [mailto:dennis.hamil...@acm.org]
>> Sent: Friday, September 2, 2016 09:05
>> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
>> Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] What Would OpenOffice Retirement Involve? (long)
> [ ... ]
>> A couple of different observations:
>>
>>> 2.4
m: Dennis E. Hamilton [mailto:dennis.hamil...@acm.org]
> Sent: Friday, September 2, 2016 09:05
> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
> Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] What Would OpenOffice Retirement Involve? (long)
>
[ ... ]
> A couple of different observations:
>
> >2.4 The mechanism
On 2016-09-06 16:00 (-0400), Jan Høydahl wrote:
> A well written Press Release from the AOO PMC could be a timely move now?
> It could be published on the Apache blog as well as sent to various editors.
> The PR should be short, to the point and suitable for copy/paste into news
> articles.
>
oposal to publish a new release in November (during
> ApacheCon), that is imho a right step.
>
>
> Jörg
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Jan Høydahl [mailto:jan@cominvent.com]
>> Sent: Tuesday, September 06, 2016 10:00 PM
>> To: dev@op
Simos Xenitellis wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 9:13 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>> Not sure how this will come across... I am certain I will not
>> be fully understood about this, anyway, this question deserves an
>> answer.
>>
>> What has been obvious, from following the numerous threads in variou
om]
>>> Sent: Tuesday, September 06, 2016 10:00 PM
>>> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
>>> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] What Would OpenOffice Retirement
>>> Involve? (long)
>>>
>>> A well written Press Release from the AOO PMC could be a
>>> t
On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 9:13 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> Not sure how this will come across... I am certain I will not
> be fully understood about this, anyway, this question deserves an
> answer.
>
> What has been obvious, from following the numerous threads in various
> places, as well as contribu
is imho a right step.
>
>
> Jörg
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Jan Høydahl [mailto:jan@cominvent.com]
>> Sent: Tuesday, September 06, 2016 10:00 PM
>> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] What Would OpenOffice Retirement
>
m: Jan Høydahl [mailto:jan@cominvent.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, September 06, 2016 10:00 PM
> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] What Would OpenOffice Retirement
> Involve? (long)
>
> A well written Press Release from the AOO PMC could be a
> timely move n
A well written Press Release from the AOO PMC could be a timely move now?
It could be published on the Apache blog as well as sent to various editors.
The PR should be short, to the point and suitable for copy/paste into news
articles.
It should paint the broader picture, the state of the project,
Not sure how this will come across... I am certain I will not
be fully understood about this, anyway, this question deserves an
answer.
What has been obvious, from following the numerous threads in various
places, as well as contributing to the 2 main ones, is just how much
"damage" Rob Weir has e
Am 09/06/2016 05:22 PM, schrieb Patricia Shanahan:
+1
I'm here for the present and the future, not the past.
I also don't know what a single person - which has left the project long
ago - has to do with a "what-if-or-if-not" thinking game.
Marcus
On 9/6/2016 8:15 AM, Rich Bowen wrote:
+1
> -Original Message-
> From: Patricia Shanahan [mailto:p...@acm.org]
> Sent: Tuesday, September 6, 2016 08:23
> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] What Would OpenOffice Retirement Involve? (long)
>
> +1
>
> I'm here for the pres
On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 5:37 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton
wrote:
> As different "technical press" outlets make their own derivations of other
> articles, there is incorrect quotation and reference to historical matters
> that have nothing to do with the present state and how we move forward.
>
> For me
+1
I'm here for the present and the future, not the past.
On 9/6/2016 8:15 AM, Rich Bowen wrote:
On 2016-09-02 09:02 (-0400), Jorg Schmidt
wrote:
never we forget how members of OpenOffice (for example, Rob Weir)
were insulted by TDF representatives.
It's important, in all of this convers
On 2016-09-02 09:02 (-0400), Jorg Schmidt wrote:
> never we forget how members of OpenOffice (for example, Rob Weir) were
> insulted by
> TDF representatives.
It's important, in all of this conversation, to keep the interests of the
*users* first. This project is about producing software fo
It appears to me that what "we" should do is to create a blog
entry on blogs.a.o which provides more depth and detail in
this whole kerfluffle. It could contain WHY the original [DISCUSS]
thread was sent, that it was, in fact, a [DISCUSS] and basically
to initiate some *thought* and not any sort of
Response in-line.
> -Original Message-
> From: Federico Leva (Nemo) [mailto:nemow...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, September 6, 2016 03:30
> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
> Subject: [DISCUSS] What Would OpenOffice Retirement Involve? (long)
>
> I see the biggest point as missing from the li
ennis.hamil...@acm.org]
> Sent: Friday, September 2, 2016 10:40
> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
> Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] What Would OpenOffice Retirement Involve? (long)
>
> And here's another:
> <http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2016/09/openoffice-after-
&g
Federico Leva (Nemo) wrote:
I see the biggest point as missing from the list/plan posted by Dennis
E. Hamilton: an easy upgrade path for current OpenOffice users
It was not a plan. It was a what-if game that tried to analyze with an
excessive level of detail how to execute one of the possible
> From: Federico Leva (Nemo) [mailto:nemow...@gmail.com]
> Perhaps some of the install/upgrade facilities could automate
> the switch
> to LibreOffice, and/or the most visited URLs (such as
> /download/ on the
> OOo website and /files/latest/download on Sourceforge) could be
> redirected to
I don't have very much free time, but once MacOSX build instructions are
rewritten and the process clean. I am willing to validate the instructions and
each step on a fresh Mac. This would also put me a position to cast a binding
vote on a release when that is ready.
Sent from my iPhone
> On S
Sent from my iPhone
> On Sep 2, 2016, at 5:37 PM, toki wrote:
>
>> On 02/09/2016 20:12, Dave Fisher wrote:
>>
>> I disagree with consumer vs corporate. Individuals have benefited greatly
>> from all of the free projects like HTTPD,
>
> HTTPD is a Daemon, run for websites --- corporate, not
On 02/09/2016 20:12, Dave Fisher wrote:
> I disagree with consumer vs corporate. Individuals have benefited greatly
> from all of the free projects like HTTPD,
HTTPD is a Daemon, run for websites --- corporate, not individuals.
>tomcat,
Web server. Again, corporate, not individuals.
>poi
T
Yes, still VERY valid!
> On Sep 2, 2016, at 12:37 PM, Dave Fisher wrote:
>
> Hi Jim,
>
> I seem to recall that you made an offer to help with Mac builds. I know you
> helped during incubation. Is your offer still valid?
>
> Regards,
> Dave
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>> On Sep 2, 2016, at 6:5
Sent from my iPhone
> On Sep 2, 2016, at 12:56 PM, toki wrote:
>
> On 02/09/2016 12:52, RA Stehmann wrote:
>
>>> being an end-user focused effort. I would suggest we focus on not
>>> being one, but instead being a framework or library that can be consumed
>>> by actual end-user implementation
On 02/09/2016 12:52, RA Stehmann wrote:
>> being an end-user focused effort. I would suggest we focus on not
>> being one, but instead being a framework or library that can be consumed
>> by actual end-user implementations.
> If AOO is not an end-user focused project
AOo is one of the few --- p
On 9/2/16 6:45 AM, Roberto Galoppini wrote:
> Quick top note: to avoid multiple mails I'll comment this and the others
> messages here.
>
> First, I totally agree with Andrea, let's focus on what needs to be done,
> it's inappropriate at best to discuss anything related to the shutdown at
> this t
27;t seen before.
> -Original Message-
> From: Dennis E. Hamilton [mailto:dennis.hamil...@acm.org]
> Sent: Friday, September 2, 2016 08:05
> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
> Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] What Would OpenOffice Retirement Involve? (long)
>
> Also, <http://lwn.net/Articles/6
Well, while I want to help, I also have to hedge my bets, so I've already
started to spend more time contributing to other open-source projects in
case AOO retires.
Regards
Damjan
On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 1:37 AM, Dennis E. Hamilton
wrote:
> Here is what a careful retirement of Apache OpenOffice
Hi Jim,
I seem to recall that you made an offer to help with Mac builds. I know you
helped during incubation. Is your offer still valid?
Regards,
Dave
Sent from my iPhone
> On Sep 2, 2016, at 6:59 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>
>
>>> On Sep 2, 2016, at 9:48 AM, Jörg Schmidt wrote:
>>>
>>> Fro
Jim Jagielski wrote:
Yes, I would assume that many existing people would leave.
Not only end-users you would likely lose existing the active
developers as well. In fact the project would be so different
that if you manage to get enough new people I think you would
have to rename it and go thr
> -Original Message-
> From: Dennis E. Hamilton [mailto:dennis.hamil...@acm.org]
> Sent: Thursday, September 1, 2016 22:08
> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
> Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] What Would OpenOffice Retirement Involve? (long)
>
>
>
> > -Original
> -Original Message-
> From: Jim Jagielski [mailto:j...@jagunet.com]
> Sent: Friday, September 2, 2016 05:14
> To: priv...@openoffice.apache.org; orc...@apache.org
> Cc: dev@openoffice.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] What Would OpenOffice Retirement Involve?
easier than that for AOO, and also much improved.
- Dennios
> -Original Message-
> From: RA Stehmann [mailto:anw...@rechtsanwalt-stehmann.de]
> Sent: Friday, September 2, 2016 04:01
> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] What Would OpenOffice Retirement Invol
> On Sep 2, 2016, at 9:48 AM, Jörg Schmidt wrote:
>
>> From: Dr. Michael Stehmann [mailto:anw...@rechtsanwalt-stehmann.de]
>
>> Patricia, we are still discussing. We are balancing reasons,
>> advantages
>> and disadvantages, for different solutions. There is no decision made.
>>
>> And more
> From: Roberto Galoppini [mailto:roberto.galopp...@gmail.com]
> We are on the same page here, and if security issues (real
> ones) would be
> left uncovered it would be fine if you and/or the board will step in.
>
> In the meanwhile PLEASE let us work, and let's see if we can
> keep changing
This whole discussion is a chance to "prove me wrong" (as someone
"out of touch") as well as to prove to the entire OO community
what those "positive things" are.
I am glad that the status-quo of today != the status-quo as of
(today - 3weeksAgo).
I am reminded of this scene from Pulp Fiction (apo
> From: Dr. Michael Stehmann [mailto:anw...@rechtsanwalt-stehmann.de]
> Patricia, we are still discussing. We are balancing reasons,
> advantages
> and disadvantages, for different solutions. There is no decision made.
>
> And more and more I believe, it was a good idea to start that
> discuss
On Sep 2, 2016 3:29 PM, "Jim Jagielski" wrote:
>
> Yes, I would assume that many existing people would leave.
>
> But, as I mentioned, I would assume (hope) that many people
> would join, and many of those would be from others in the
> entire OO eco-system.
>
> Your reply seems to suggest that wit
Am 02.09.2016 um 15:08 schrieb Patricia Shanahan:
>
> This discussion has a serious self fulfilling prophecy downside. The
> less ASF's commitment to AOO, the less my commitment is. I had been
> thinking of buying a Mac and learning to do builds on it. That is an
> investment of time, energy, and
BTW, can we drop private@ on this and simply continue the
discussion on dev@?
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Yes, I would assume that many existing people would leave.
But, as I mentioned, I would assume (hope) that many people
would join, and many of those would be from others in the
entire OO eco-system.
Your reply seems to suggest that with the current status of AOO,
maintaining an end-user focus is
On 9/2/2016 5:52 AM, RA Stehmann wrote:
Am 02.09.2016 um 14:14 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
What is obvious is that the AOO project cannot support, at the present
time, being an end-user focused effort. I would suggest we focus on not
being one, but instead being a framework or library that can be c
> From: Jim Jagielski [mailto:j...@jagunet.com]
> Secondly, as alluded to above, we should prepare ourselves
> for the FUD,
> the "AOO is dead" victory chants, the numerous anti-AOO and
> anti-Apache
> spewings, etc... There are some who will use this as a self-serving
> soapboxing opportunity,
Am 02.09.2016 um 14:14 schrieb Jim Jagielski:
>
> What is obvious is that the AOO project cannot support, at the present
> time, being an end-user focused effort. I would suggest we focus on not
> being one, but instead being a framework or library that can be consumed
> by actual end-user implem
Dennis, thanks for opening up this conversation.
As noted over the last few months, it has become obvious to the
board that AOO has not been a healthy project for some time.
Again, there are many, many reasons for this, and it doesn't
help to go into them here and now. The simple fact is that we a
Hello,
our discussion became public:
http://www.linux-magazin.de/content/view/full/106599
This shows a public interest. So "going public" seems not to difficult.
Kind regards
Michael
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Quick top note: to avoid multiple mails I'll comment this and the others
messages here.
First, I totally agree with Andrea, let's focus on what needs to be done,
it's inappropriate at best to discuss anything related to the shutdown at
this time. Yet if someone enjoys the exercise of style that's
Hello,
> From: Dr. Michael Stehmann [mailto:anw...@rechtsanwalt-stehmann.de]
> the situation as I see it (I am no developer) is, that we need
> "developers, developers, developers, developers ... ".
> [...]
This is not wrong, but ...
Developers will participate primarily in projects which re
Hello,
the situation as I see it (I am no developer) is, that we need
"developers, developers, developers, developers ... ".
So why not "going public" and ask the Free Software community for help?
That means to illustrate, why AOO is important for the progress of Free
Software, and to describe o
Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
One option for remedy that must be considered is retirement of the project. ...
There are those who fear that discussing retirement can become a
self-fulfilling prophecy.
This is becoming too much. There are other options. Namely, a new
release will invalidate the p
> -Original Message-
> From: Phillip Rhodes [mailto:motley.crue@gmail.com]
> Sent: Thursday, September 1, 2016 21:49
> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org; Dennis Hamilton
> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] What Would OpenOffice Retirement Involve? (long)
>
> >
> >
&
> -Original Message-
> From: Phillip Rhodes [mailto:motley.crue@gmail.com]
> Sent: Thursday, September 1, 2016 21:23
> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
> Cc: priv...@openoffice.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] What Would OpenOffice Retirement Involve? (long)
>
>
>
> What alternative do you see?
>
>
>
There's no particular reason that I can see, that AOO shouldn't be able to
produce secure software, issue releases and
do all of those other things. We've done it in the past (and yeah, I feel
guilty about saying "we" since I haven't been very active. Mea c
> -Original Message-
> From: Phillip Rhodes [mailto:motley.crue@gmail.com]
> Sent: Thursday, September 1, 2016 21:16
> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org; orc...@apache.org
> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] What Would OpenOffice Retirement Involve? (long)
>
> Wow, just wow. I
> (3) I think that working towards being able to release rather than patch
> as Patricia has suggested is our best way to solve the security issue. The
> quick patch is not much faster and has been proven to be more of a
> challenge then kick starting the broken build process.
>
Forgive me for be
Wow, just wow. I have to say, I think even broaching this topic is a
mistake. "Self-fulfilling prophecy"? Not even that, it'll be a "3rd party
fulfilling prophecy" as soon as this hits the press. There are a lot of
people out there who seem to have it in for AOO and have for a while... now
you *
[BCC to PMC]
> -Original Message-
> From: Dave Fisher [mailto:dave2w...@comcast.net]
> Sent: Thursday, September 1, 2016 19:27
> To: priv...@openoffice.apache.org
> Cc: dev@openoffice.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] What Would OpenOffice Retirement Involve? (lo
Hmm ... the discussion sounds a bit like Brexit ...
With the important difference that it is now evident that Brexit
didn't have a plan.
Having a retirement plan is important for our users and for the ASF
and while I think the discussion is sane and important I think we should
focus now on the
Hi Dennis,
I don't have objections to this topic, but I feel I need to make a few
suggestions before this thread is either ignored or a confused mess.
(1) a long, official policy statement like this is best put into a wiki page
where many can edit it and it can be an easy discussion and not a c
76 matches
Mail list logo
