++1 > On Sep 6, 2016, at 5:51 PM, Jan Høydahl <jan....@cominvent.com> wrote: > > A public statement may slow the flood of FUD, protecting our end users, while > a new release in November will > give a clear signal that the project did not choose retirement, ss will all > subsequent releases. > > -- > Jan Høydahl, search solution architect > Cominvent AS - www.cominvent.com > >> 6. sep. 2016 kl. 22.25 skrev Jörg Schmidt <joe...@j-m-schmidt.de>: >> >> The task of AOO is not the formulation of their own death message, but the >> further development of the project, *even* in difficult times. >> >> There was the proposal 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@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 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, the current push for >>> more developers etc. It could also explain ASF's focus on >>> healthy communities, >>> as an explanation for the [DISCUSS] thread, and the fact that >>> an Apache project >>> not longer able to produce releases *may* end up being retired. >>> >>> Could we get writing help from Apache public relations staff? >>> >>> -- >>> Jan Høydahl, search solution architect >>> Cominvent AS - www.cominvent.com >>> >>>> 6. sep. 2016 kl. 20.13 skrev Jim Jagielski <j...@jagunet.com>: >>>> >>>> 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 either done or has been attributed to >>> have done. >>>> I guess the best way to state it is that he was a very "polarizing" >>>> person... >>>> >>>> Now a lot of the ill-will (and even worse, the hate) >>> directed towards >>>> AOO is not due to anything we personally did, but is simply >>> redirected >>>> venom, mostly due to how LO felt abused and used by Oracle and that >>>> somehow we were complicit in it (this fallacy, of course, >>> was maintained >>>> by people who had a not-so-hidden-agenda to create and reinforce the >>>> division between AOO and LO). There was really very, very >>> little rational >>>> cause for TDF/LO hating Apache and AOO so much... or, at >>> least, developers >>>> on that side being so antagonist towards Apache (I am >>> ignoring, for the >>>> present, those extreme copyleft proponents who have issue >>> w/ permissive >>>> licensing for anything). What I'm basically saying is that we did >>>> nothing really to deserve the hate... >>>> >>>> ... except for maybe some of the "over zealous" statements by Rob. >>>> >>>> What is kinda clear is that there is still a lot of sting there. >>>> >>>> Now I did somewhat try to "explain" how such >>> over-zealousness shouldn't >>>> be so surprising, considering what he was fighting against >>> (this explanation >>>> was in the LWN thread), but rationalization isn't excuse. >>>> >>>> No, I am not saying we focus on the past... but while we are >>>> here for the present and future, we shouldn't "ignore" the past >>>> but rather acknowledge it, and then bury it. >>>> >>>> After all, aren't we asking TDF/LO to do the same?? >>>> >>>>> On Sep 6, 2016, at 1:57 PM, Marcus <marcus.m...@wtnet.de> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> 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: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 2016-09-02 09:02 (-0400), Jorg Schmidt <joe...@j-m-schmidt.de> >>>>>>> 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 for the >>>>>>> public good, not about winning some contest, or nursing our hurt >>>>>>> feelings. We owe it to the users to forgive and forget actual and >>>>>>> perceived insults, and move on with our lives. >>> Otherwise, what the >>>>>>> heck are we doing here? >>>>> >>>>> >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>> 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 >>>> >>> >>> >> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> 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
