--- On Wed, 9/7/11, Alexander Thurgood wrote:
Le 06/09/11 05:34, Jean Weber a écrit :
Hi Jean, all,
I am afraid we must still do this. Perhaps it's
easier to find the people that oppose ..
Can we legally make a call to everyone that
opposes the change to speak up before
a
On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 10:54, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote:
On Mon, Sep 5, 2011 at 7:28 PM, Jean Weber jeanwe...@gmail.com wrote:
... one alternative would be to upload
the doc to Apache-Extra.org. Projects there are hosted by Google
Code, and also agree to these guidelines:
On Mon, Sep 5, 2011 at 23:02, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote:
Wearing my IBM hat, the larger issue, one that may not concern
everyone here but does concern me, is the impact the license choice
has on our ability to attract corporate-sponsored contributors to an
effort that is not using a
On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 7:18 AM, Jean Weber jeanwe...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Sep 5, 2011 at 23:02, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote:
Wearing my IBM hat, the larger issue, one that may not concern
everyone here but does concern me, is the impact the license choice
has on our ability to
Hi Rob,
Something to remember is that Symphony is only the three main apps.
It does not cover, for example, Base. So even if we did switch to
Symphony docs for the core, we'd still need to find a way to cover the
other pieces.
Does that mean we could have for AOO a commun trunk with
On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 11:41 AM, Guy Waterval waterval@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Rob,
Something to remember is that Symphony is only the three main apps.
It does not cover, for example, Base. So even if we did switch to
Symphony docs for the core, we'd still need to find a way to cover the
On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 22:29, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote:
On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 7:18 AM, Jean Weber jeanwe...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm fairly sure that whatever route AOOo chooses to take, I won't be
interested in being part of it. I had no real idea of what would be
involved here (I
On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 07:01, Jean Weber jeanwe...@gmail.com wrote:
Regardless of what the other members of ODFAuthors choose to do
regarding AOOo and the existing user guides, and where they choose to
do it, I am burnt out and not interested in continuing.
That includes, in case it's not
Jean,
You will be missed! Your dedication, attention to detail, and global view of
the project made the wheels turn and kept the work on track. With Hazel and you
moving on, we'll have big boots to fill.
I appreciate your effort and I wish I had been able to work more closely with
you.
Thank
I am also extremely disappointed by the tone of many of the conversations on
ooo-dev - particularly in the last week, and I understand if you have no desire
to add unhealthful stress to life. It's a problem for me as well.
Wishing you all the best and sorry this happened.
Best Regards,
Dave
Le 06/09/11 05:34, Jean Weber a écrit :
Hi Jean, all,
I am afraid we must still do this. Perhaps it's easier
to find the people that oppose .. Can we legally make
a call to everyone that opposes the change to speak up
before a certain deadline?
I don't know if that would be legal, but
Just trying to be quite clear on something here, since every time the
topic turns up, it seems to mutate into a wider discussion without
actually answering the question of the relationship of the existing
user guides to AOOo.
We have established that relicensing the existing OOo user guides
On Mon, Sep 5, 2011 at 8:34 AM, Jean Weber jeanwe...@gmail.com wrote:
Just trying to be quite clear on something here, since every time the
topic turns up, it seems to mutate into a wider discussion without
actually answering the question of the relationship of the existing
user guides to
--- On Mon, 9/5/11, Jean Weber jeanwe...@gmail.com wrote:
...
We have established that relicensing the existing OOo user
guides (which are licensed CC-BY) to the Apache license
is not practical.
Does this mean, as Rob has suggested, that these guides
*cannot* be part of the official
The fundamental point is that Apache projects need to produce useful
software for the public good, under the Apache license.
I.e. users of Apache software have expectations that they can make use
of Apache products - as well as the source code of those projects -
under the Apache license.
On Mon, Sep 5, 2011 at 23:02, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote:
What should I tell the small group that remains from the ODFAuthors
team that has been working on the user guides?
Feel free to share this note. You could invite them to discuss here
at ooo-dev, or I'd be happy to answer
On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 07:52, Jean Weber jeanwe...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Sep 5, 2011 at 23:02, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote:
What should I tell the small group that remains from the ODFAuthors
team that has been working on the user guides?
Feel free to share this note. You could
On Mon, Sep 5, 2011 at 23:02, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote:
On Mon, Sep 5, 2011 at 8:34 AM, Jean Weber jeanwe...@gmail.com wrote:
I think Rob's suggestions for boldly going where OOo Docs have not
gone before are good ones, but they won't happen immediately. In the
short term (for the
On Mon, Sep 5, 2011 at 23:02, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote:
Wearing my IBM hat, the larger issue, one that may not concern
everyone here but does concern me, is the impact the license choice
has on our ability to attract corporate-sponsored contributors to an
effort that is not using a
On Mon, Sep 5, 2011 at 7:28 PM, Jean Weber jeanwe...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Sep 5, 2011 at 23:02, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote:
On Mon, Sep 5, 2011 at 8:34 AM, Jean Weber jeanwe...@gmail.com wrote:
I think Rob's suggestions for boldly going where OOo Docs have not
gone before are good
On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 10:54, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote:
On Mon, Sep 5, 2011 at 7:28 PM, Jean Weber jeanwe...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Sep 5, 2011 at 23:02, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote:
On Mon, Sep 5, 2011 at 8:34 AM, Jean Weber jeanwe...@gmail.com wrote:
I think Rob's
On Sep 5, 2011, at 6:04 PM, Jean Weber wrote:
On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 10:54, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote:
On Mon, Sep 5, 2011 at 7:28 PM, Jean Weber jeanwe...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Sep 5, 2011 at 23:02, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote:
On Mon, Sep 5, 2011 at 8:34 AM, Jean Weber
Hi Jean;
Continuing on the topic of my general ignorance ...
--- On Mon, 9/5/11, Jean Weber jeanwe...@gmail.com wrote:
...
It's not clear to me that the user guides produced by
ODFAuthors are in fact official documentation even
though they are made available as ODT and PDF through
the OOo
On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 11:53, Pedro F. Giffuni giffu...@tutopia.com wrote:
Hi Jean;
Continuing on the topic of my general ignorance ...
--- On Mon, 9/5/11, Jean Weber jeanwe...@gmail.com wrote:
...
It's not clear to me that the user guides produced by
ODFAuthors are in fact official
On 9/5/2011 22:57, Jean Weber wrote:
On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 11:53, Pedro F. Giffunigiffu...@tutopia.com wrote:
Hi Jean;
Continuing on the topic of my general ignorance ...
--- On Mon, 9/5/11, Jean Weberjeanwe...@gmail.com wrote:
...
It's not clear to me that the user guides produced by
Responding to some other points in this note
On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 11:53, Pedro F. Giffuni giffu...@tutopia.com wrote:
I recall someone (maybe you) had said that the
ODFAuthors wanted to keep independent. If they
want to join the podling they are welcome.
Sure. Each person can choose
On Tue, 6 Sep 2011 12:57:50 +1000, Jean Weber jeanwe...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 11:53, Pedro F. Giffuni giffu...@tutopia.com
wrote:
...
We are talking about the same documents here?
http://documentation.openoffice.org/
That page is just a portal; most of its links point
27 matches
Mail list logo
