Re: [VOTE][DISCUSS] What should we do with the Why Compliance? page on the website
On 19/02/15 22:38, Andrea Pescetti wrote: Rob Weir wrote: Thread for discussion Come on, what's this? Do you guys read this list? We had this conversation earlier this month, not ages ago. It ended like this: http://markmail.org/message/2ae5vrtevxyizaje [Andrea] The page provides relevant information in a bad way. It is by keeping it as it is that we play the game of haters. I'll propose a rewrite next weekend. Now, weekends do not last 5 days, unfortunately, and life on the OpenOffice lists has been more eventful than I expected. But I very much prefer that instead of flooding the list as a handful of people did in the last few hours, someone would remember this and either say that we were still waiting for my rewrite or that they were replacing me in the task since I'm clearly late. But voting on the abstract option of replacing the page which something that doesn't exist does not really make a lot of sense to me. And it sounds too much like the usual we talk about something expecting that someone else does the work that I'd like we abandon. Well, my offer to rewrite it remains valid... but you'll have to be patient until next weekend! thanks Andrea that you still offer a rewrite for further discussion. I think this is the way to go. I still see valid points on this page and I believe it can help people to understand a bit more all this license jungle. At least the ones who are interested. And let us put a clear disclaimer on top of the page that is the view of the AOO PMC and not ASF in general. Juergen - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [VOTE][DISCUSS] What should we do with the Why Compliance? page on the website
For what it's worth (and I'm sure there are some on this list who believe it is worth very little), I didn't and don't like the GPL-bashing verbiage, precisely because it is not consistent with ASF statements and leaves ASF open to the kind of criticism Bradley Kuhn has leveled. The page was originally written and discussed at a time when some factions of the PMC were not really entertaining dissent from an agenda of emphasizing the differences between AOO and LO/TDF, and I didn't feel it would help for me to suggest that AOO should concentrate on engineering and if anything practice generosity towards sister projects (which is closer to the Apache Way). But, since you've called for discussion and vote, I would vote -1 on leaving the page as-is, and +1 on changing it as JimJag (VP of Legal Affairs) has asked. Danese On Feb 20, 2015, at 1:28 AM, Rob Weir r...@robweir.com wrote: Thread for discussion - 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
Re: [VOTE][DISCUSS] What should we do with the Why Compliance? page on the website
I know we are waiting on Andrea's rewrite, but I would ask why bother to rewrite. Here are three reasons why the page should be removed from all language versions and not just hidden. (1) How does the PMC even know what this carefully nuanced page even says in another language like Chinese, Arabic, German, Russian, and the rest? (2) These pages cause a fracture in the overall OpenOffice / ODF ecosystem whether or not all of us acknowledge that fact. (3) These pages also damage the reputation of the ASF. The only way to handle our responsibilities as a PMC is to remove these pages in every language. Regards, Dave On Feb 20, 2015, at 12:37 AM, Danese Cooper wrote: For what it's worth (and I'm sure there are some on this list who believe it is worth very little), I didn't and don't like the GPL-bashing verbiage, precisely because it is not consistent with ASF statements and leaves ASF open to the kind of criticism Bradley Kuhn has leveled. The page was originally written and discussed at a time when some factions of the PMC were not really entertaining dissent from an agenda of emphasizing the differences between AOO and LO/TDF, and I didn't feel it would help for me to suggest that AOO should concentrate on engineering and if anything practice generosity towards sister projects (which is closer to the Apache Way). But, since you've called for discussion and vote, I would vote -1 on leaving the page as-is, and +1 on changing it as JimJag (VP of Legal Affairs) has asked. Danese On Feb 20, 2015, at 1:28 AM, Rob Weir r...@robweir.com wrote: Thread for discussion - 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
Re: [VOTE][DISCUSS] What should we do with the Why Compliance? page on the website
Am 02/20/2015 11:55 PM, schrieb Dave Fisher: I know we are waiting on Andrea's rewrite, but I would ask why bother to rewrite. Here are three reasons why the page should be removed from all language versions and not just hidden. (1) How does the PMC even know what this carefully nuanced page even says in another language like Chinese, Arabic, German, Russian, and the rest? that's also true for any other webpage that was localized. This is not special to the webpage we discuss. (2) These pages cause a fracture in the overall OpenOffice / ODF ecosystem whether or not all of us acknowledge that fact. Primarily I see www.openoffice.org as a portal for our software. It's not a general homepage for the community around everything that is based on OpenOffice or ODF. At least I cannot see pointers and text that mentioned other software and extensions *and* it would count as *majority* for the ecosystem. (3) These pages also damage the reputation of the ASF. Then remove/rewrite the parts. The only way to handle our responsibilities as a PMC is to remove these pages in every language. This is your opinion. However, the vote until now speaks a different language. Sorry, but removal is nothing more than the easy way out. When we cannot come to a new and agreed version of the text, then we can delete it completely. My 2 ct Marcus On Feb 20, 2015, at 12:37 AM, Danese Cooper wrote: For what it's worth (and I'm sure there are some on this list who believe it is worth very little), I didn't and don't like the GPL-bashing verbiage, precisely because it is not consistent with ASF statements and leaves ASF open to the kind of criticism Bradley Kuhn has leveled. The page was originally written and discussed at a time when some factions of the PMC were not really entertaining dissent from an agenda of emphasizing the differences between AOO and LO/TDF, and I didn't feel it would help for me to suggest that AOO should concentrate on engineering and if anything practice generosity towards sister projects (which is closer to the Apache Way). But, since you've called for discussion and vote, I would vote -1 on leaving the page as-is, and +1 on changing it as JimJag (VP of Legal Affairs) has asked. Danese On Feb 20, 2015, at 1:28 AM, Rob Weirr...@robweir.com wrote: Thread for discussion - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
RE: [VOTE][DISCUSS] What should we do with the Why Compliance? page on the website
I favor the option proposed by Tim Williams. I think a good interim maneuver is to remove the sidebar link and then we can fuss about the page ad lib. I haven't checked on the notice that Marcus put up just yet. If that stays, it needs to ripple through the translations too. If I have to cast a ballot on the [VOTE] as worded, it will be for deletion. - Dennis -Original Message- From: Tim Williams [mailto:william...@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2015 09:53 To: dev@openoffice.apache.org Subject: Re: Proposal to change or remove a web page that seems to cause unfruitful discussions. On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 12:44 PM, jan i j...@apache.org wrote: [ ... ] I simply do not see the need that AOO goes out alone, on confrontation course with ASF, to explain the difference in licenses seen specifically for our pow. We do not need this kind of pointing fingers. Let other projects use the license they believe in and let us use the license ASF believe in without telling we are better or even different than the others. fwiw, as a lurker here, that approach is much more consistent with the broader culture around here. Leave the provocative stuff to personal blogs and media. I think a good solution is to just delete the page and add a link to the faq[1] to your existing 'free' page[2] - I just don't see any value beyond what's already written between those two. Thanks, --tim [1] - http://www.apache.org/foundation/license-faq.html#WhatDoesItMEAN [2] - http://www.openoffice.org/why/why_free.html - 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
Re: [VOTE][DISCUSS] What should we do with the Why Compliance? page on the website
Rob Weir wrote: Thread for discussion Come on, what's this? Do you guys read this list? We had this conversation earlier this month, not ages ago. It ended like this: http://markmail.org/message/2ae5vrtevxyizaje [Andrea] The page provides relevant information in a bad way. It is by keeping it as it is that we play the game of haters. I'll propose a rewrite next weekend. Now, weekends do not last 5 days, unfortunately, and life on the OpenOffice lists has been more eventful than I expected. But I very much prefer that instead of flooding the list as a handful of people did in the last few hours, someone would remember this and either say that we were still waiting for my rewrite or that they were replacing me in the task since I'm clearly late. But voting on the abstract option of replacing the page which something that doesn't exist does not really make a lot of sense to me. And it sounds too much like the usual we talk about something expecting that someone else does the work that I'd like we abandon. Well, my offer to rewrite it remains valid... but you'll have to be patient until next weekend! Regards, Andrea. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [VOTE][DISCUSS] What should we do with the Why Compliance? page on the website
On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 4:38 PM, Andrea Pescetti pesce...@apache.org wrote: Rob Weir wrote: Thread for discussion Come on, what's this? Do you guys read this list? We had this conversation earlier this month, not ages ago. It ended like this: http://markmail.org/message/2ae5vrtevxyizaje Unfortunately we have a party who wants to steamroll through a fast delete unless I immediately show proof of consensus for another option. From what I've been able to ascertain a vote is the only acceptable proof. Personally, I'd be happy to look at your eventual version. I think many others would as well. The vote does not really change that. Regards, -Rob [Andrea] The page provides relevant information in a bad way. It is by keeping it as it is that we play the game of haters. I'll propose a rewrite next weekend. Now, weekends do not last 5 days, unfortunately, and life on the OpenOffice lists has been more eventful than I expected. But I very much prefer that instead of flooding the list as a handful of people did in the last few hours, someone would remember this and either say that we were still waiting for my rewrite or that they were replacing me in the task since I'm clearly late. But voting on the abstract option of replacing the page which something that doesn't exist does not really make a lot of sense to me. And it sounds too much like the usual we talk about something expecting that someone else does the work that I'd like we abandon. Well, my offer to rewrite it remains valid... but you'll have to be patient until next weekend! Regards, Andrea. - 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
Re: [VOTE][DISCUSS] What should we do with the Why Compliance? page on the website
OK, it seems your offer good lost as the topic got more intensive today. At least this applies to me. So, sorry from myside. When the forecast of the vote still remains then you can still do the rework of the webpage. At least this work should be not for nothing. Marcus Am 02/19/2015 10:38 PM, schrieb Andrea Pescetti: Rob Weir wrote: Thread for discussion Come on, what's this? Do you guys read this list? We had this conversation earlier this month, not ages ago. It ended like this: http://markmail.org/message/2ae5vrtevxyizaje [Andrea] The page provides relevant information in a bad way. It is by keeping it as it is that we play the game of haters. I'll propose a rewrite next weekend. Now, weekends do not last 5 days, unfortunately, and life on the OpenOffice lists has been more eventful than I expected. But I very much prefer that instead of flooding the list as a handful of people did in the last few hours, someone would remember this and either say that we were still waiting for my rewrite or that they were replacing me in the task since I'm clearly late. But voting on the abstract option of replacing the page which something that doesn't exist does not really make a lot of sense to me. And it sounds too much like the usual we talk about something expecting that someone else does the work that I'd like we abandon. Well, my offer to rewrite it remains valid... but you'll have to be patient until next weekend! - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [VOTE][DISCUSS] What should we do with the Why Compliance? page on the website
On Feb 19, 2015, at 2:09 PM, Rob Weir wrote: On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 4:38 PM, Andrea Pescetti pesce...@apache.org wrote: Rob Weir wrote: Thread for discussion Come on, what's this? Do you guys read this list? We had this conversation earlier this month, not ages ago. It ended like this: http://markmail.org/message/2ae5vrtevxyizaje Unfortunately we have a party who wants to steamroll through a fast delete unless I immediately show proof of consensus for another option. From what I've been able to ascertain a vote is the only acceptable proof. Personally, I'd be happy to look at your eventual version. I think many others would as well. The vote does not really change that. Just saying. There are two ways to look at who is steamrolling. When the ASF is saying that there is a problem then it needs to be considered. You are providing a vote that proves we want Change - the range of this is large and ill defined. Your choices are missing options like: [ ] Convert to a positive statement about the AL2.0 plus provide some links on license compliance. Link to third parties. [ ] Make the minimal changes to satisfy the Foundation. Originally I was about preserving and converting the openoffice.org site and then doing minimal changes. Once I may have support this page. Now I feel that there are issues that reflect poorly on the Foundation. Regards, Dave Regards, -Rob [Andrea] The page provides relevant information in a bad way. It is by keeping it as it is that we play the game of haters. I'll propose a rewrite next weekend. Now, weekends do not last 5 days, unfortunately, and life on the OpenOffice lists has been more eventful than I expected. But I very much prefer that instead of flooding the list as a handful of people did in the last few hours, someone would remember this and either say that we were still waiting for my rewrite or that they were replacing me in the task since I'm clearly late. But voting on the abstract option of replacing the page which something that doesn't exist does not really make a lot of sense to me. And it sounds too much like the usual we talk about something expecting that someone else does the work that I'd like we abandon. Well, my offer to rewrite it remains valid... but you'll have to be patient until next weekend! Regards, Andrea. - 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
