On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 11:28 AM, Jörg Schmidt <joe...@j-m-schmidt.de> wrote: >> From: Peter Junge [mailto:peter.ju...@gmx.org] > >> > *We would be pleased if the Apache paid. Apache wants to do that?* >> >> As far as I understand the Apache way: Apache products must >> be hosted by >> Apache infrastructure(*), > > If the Apache to want that's OK. > > > But please check it out my problem: > > if I develop something that is useful for the users of AOO, and I'm AOO > community member, how can I tell you when I'm not allowed to talk about it? >
I think this page covers it well: http://www.apache.org/foundation/how-it-works.html#roles Especially the part on multiple "hats": "Individuals compose the ASF All of the ASF including the board, the other officers, the committers, and the members, are participating as individuals. That is one strength of the ASF, affiliations do not cloud the personal contributions. Unless they specifically state otherwise, whatever they post on any mailing list is done as themselves. It is the individual point-of-view, wearing their personal hat and not as a mouthpiece for whatever company happens to be signing their paychecks right now, and not even as a director of the ASF. All of those ASF people implicitly have multiple hats, especially the Board, the other officers, and the PMC chairs. They sometimes need to talk about a matter of policy, so to avoid appearing to be expressing a personal opinion, they will state that they are talking in their special capacity. However, most of the time this is not necessary, personal opinions work well. Some people declare their hats by using a special footer to their email, others enclose their statements in special quotation marks, others use their apache.org email address when otherwise they would use their personal one. This latter method is not reliable, as many people use their apache.org address all of the time." So how do we apply this to 3rd party announcements? For example, I think it is always fair for an individual to post a message to a mailing list, with news about a new release. The post comes from an personal email address, not an Apache one, and it is clear to everyone that it is not an official project announcement. However, when we put something on a website, it is not clear what hat is speaking. And when it is put on a major page, like the German homepage, it will look, to users, exactly like an official project announcement. Of course, it is important to help promote the ecosystem, and the contributions of 3rd parties. We have ways of doing this. Look at the consultants directory, or the list of third party books, or the ports and distributions page. They all have something in common: 1) We put a disclaimer stating that these are 3rd party items, not endorsed by the project. 2) We don't advertise them directly on the home page. > These are the facts: > > -I am member of the community for 8 years (first in OOo now at AOO) > -the PrOOo-Box for years in Germany as the CD of the community known (and > *not* as a product of a third party) > -the PrOOo-box is only made by german AOO community members > > And all to what is going on is a temporary news-teaser. > > > Is it the Apache-way to tell their own community members, no we do not want > the reports to her about your work? > May only be called public work of community members when it takes place on > Apache sites? > > A news teaser is not a press release, not a privilege, it is only a piece of > information for users. > I disagree. Placement of announcements the homepage is not something we do for all 3rd parties. We can discuss whether, as a project, we want to start doing that. But our practice has been not to allow that. It would be unfair to do this selectively. > > And please, let me put it exactly: > > the problem is not _the one_ teaser, the problem is my lack of understanding > as we locally on site, can work for AOO when we officially allowed to say > anything about it. > > The PrOOo box is a result of our work, the work of the German AOO community, > why can not you report it? > There is nothing wrong with reporting it on the mailing list, from a personal email address. Maybe we could have a blog post as well? We did that with winPenPack, where I interviewed the project lead. There are ways for us to recognize ecosystem contributions. But an advertisement on the home page is not one of them. > AND: > > *Why wants to Apache, we advertise [1] on the PrOOo box for Apache when it is > not desired the other hand, we mention the PrOOo-box?* > > [1] > That was the content of the request we received from tradema...@apache.org, > because there was requested that we put a link to the project pages of > Apache. We gladly accepted of course. > We receive permission requests from many parties who wish to redistribute AOO. But so far we have never put an advertisement for any of them on our homepage. Regards, -Rob > > > Greetings, > Jörg > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
