Kazunari Hirano khir...@gmail.com wrote on 06/09/2011 08:46:05 AM:
Let us open up new markets and allow all the people on the earth to
use our great Office Suite in their native languages!
We are all sure that OpenOffice.org/StarOffice/StarSuite benefit them.
Thanks
It is very exciting to
Volker Merschmann merschm...@gmail.com wrote on 06/09/2011 02:33:09 AM:
as most of the discussion happened when I slept, I will give a
summarizinig answer from the top. (With unusally top-posting against
the netiquette)
There are two associations (german: eingetragener Verein abbrev.
Michael Meeks michael.me...@novell.com wrote on 06/09/2011 12:27:56 PM:
In the deluge of drivel I lost this gem in your response to
my scepticism about how quickly you could provide a binary release:
On Fri, 2011-06-03 at 10:31 -0400, robert_w...@us.ibm.com wrote:
But one thing
Andre Schnabel andre.schna...@gmx.net wrote on 06/08/2011 04:40:56 AM:
Von: Yegor Kozlov ye...@apache.org
I'm interested in bringing the ODF Toolkit to Apache and integrating
this API with Apache POI. With ODF, POI will become a universal API
for Office documents covering most of
Manfred A. Reiter ma.rei...@gmail.com wrote on 06/08/2011 10:17:02 AM:
2011/6/7 robert_w...@us.ibm.com:
[...]
We should be able to check the math from another direction. Microsoft
claims something like 400 million Office users. Studies looking at
OOo
install share show
dsh daniel.hais...@googlemail.com wrote on 06/08/2011 10:37:46 AM:
On Wed, Jun 8, 2011 at 3:58 PM, robert_w...@us.ibm.com wrote:
A sufficiently complex business application based on OpenOffice is
going
to involve document manipulations at both tiers. For example, we
recently
(at IBM)
dsh daniel.hais...@googlemail.com wrote on 06/08/2011 12:15:52 PM:
Of course we had been using ODFDOM but the issue is how do you get ODF
transformed accordingly to other formats such as RTF, AFP or PDF and
make those formats look consistent with what you would get if doing
the
Simon Phipps si...@webmink.com wrote on 06/08/2011 06:44:35 PM:
I was actually thinking of Freies Office Deutschland e.V. primarily,
http://www.frodev.org/
Interesting. That happens to also be where TDF donations go:
http://www.documentfoundation.org/contribution/
-Rob
Volker Merschmann merschm...@gmail.com wrote on 06/07/2011 11:08:26 AM:
Hi Robert,
2011/6/7 Robert Burrell Donkin robertburrelldon...@gmail.com:
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 8:51 PM, Louis Suárez-Potts lui...@gmail.com
wrote:
Tomorrow, the OpenOffice.org Community Council will hold a
Danese Cooper dan...@gmail.com wrote on 06/07/2011 11:13:45 AM:
3) LOTS of people download OOo
Like maybe 10% of the human population of the planet. And its a big
file.
Initially we engaged Akamai, but it quickly became too expensive.
Serving up downloads of OOo was pretty intense.
Florian Effenberger flo...@documentfoundation.org wrote on 06/07/2011
12:01:55 PM:
Rob,
robert_w...@us.ibm.com wrote on 2011-06-07 17.56:
Oh, let's not go down that path again, or else someone could equally
point
out that the TDF Steering Committee has not been elected yet either. I
By my count we have now have over 60 individuals listed on as proposed
committers for the Apache OpenOffice project. I think this is a
respectable start, though obviously the project will need to have a strong
commitment to recruiting additional developers and growing the project
further,
Danese Cooper dan...@gmail.com wrote on 06/07/2011 02:19:38 PM:
Just have to say...I have often been quoted saying the advent of
OpenOffice.org was a rare case of corporate greed aligning with
human need. Safe to assume a high percentage of downloaders don't
have $.99. I know we're all
Leo Simons m...@leosimons.com wrote on 06/07/2011 02:40:01 PM:
On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 6:58 PM, robert_w...@us.ibm.com wrote:
Since this is a large download, I wonder whether the quoted numbers
are
impacted at all by timeouts, abandoned downloads attempts, etc. In
other
words, is it
Danese Cooper dan...@gmail.com wrote on 06/07/2011 03:43:56 PM:
robert_w...@us.ibm.com:
Not surprisingly, you missed my point (or chose to ignore it). We at
Honestly, your insult does surprise me.
Apache don't think that money is evil, but we also believe that
seeing our code in wide
Greg Stein gst...@gmail.com wrote on 06/07/2011 05:50:49 PM:
Besides the content Oracle owns, it seems we could just ask the other
owners
to give the CWS's to the ASF. I mean, really... *somebody* out there
holds
the copyright. We just have to determine who, and then ask. Some
definite
Dave Fisher dave2w...@comcast.net wrote on 06/07/2011 09:23:25 PM:
Sure. Hi everyone (maybe the people that Rob knows should introduce
themselves as well - some of us are new to the community.)
My name is David Fisher. I have been in the software industry for
over 30 years. I've worked
Dirk-Willem van Gulik di...@webweaving.org wrote on 06/06/2011 04:27:04
AM:
On 6 Jun 2011, at 09:13, Andreas Kuckartz wrote:
Am 06.06.2011 09:25, schrieb Greg Stein:
One of the main topics of the whole discussion regarding the
OpenOffice.org incubation proposal was and is collaboration
I'l hoping to be in Berlin for the ODF Plugfest there, July 14-15th. Would
it be worth while seeing if we can arrange a hackfest of some sort in
Berlin, either the day before, or over the weekend? LibreOffice guys
invited as well, of course.
Could also have some startup sessions, to review
Christoph Jopp j...@gmx.de wrote on 06/06/2011 07:57:19 AM:
Dear All,
I put myself on the initial committers list because I want to help the
Apache OpenOffice Project in some way I can.
As nearly nobody should know my name, I'll introduce myself briefly:
Since 2005 I tried to support
Keith Curtis keit...@gmail.com wrote on 06/05/2011 04:30:17 AM:
Here is a section of my book that gives a case study on forks:
http://keithcu.com/wordpress/?page_id=558
Maybe I'll make another case study about you guys in the future,
depending on how far you get ;-)
Please do check
Italo Vignoli italo.vign...@gmail.com wrote on 06/05/2011 07:30:43 AM:
.
.
.
So, after having read hundreds of emails discussing the merits of
different licenses and processes, concentrating on the geography where
the code should live (basically, US vs EU, or Delaware vs Germany), I am
André Schnabel andre.schna...@gmx.net wrote on 06/05/2011 12:17:40 PM:
Hi Rob,
I don't want to leave this unanswered, although I very likely cannot
provide the answers
you like to get ... (steering-discuss in cc, so that other SC memebers
might agree or
disagree)
Am 04.06.2011 02:09,
Niall Pemberton niall.pember...@gmail.com wrote on 06/05/2011 02:21:01
PM:
This proposal raises lots of questions, but the requirements for
entering the incubator are not high and so IMO don't need to be
answered before a vote. The only reason I believe for rejecting this
proposal would be
Joe Schaefer joe_schae...@yahoo.com wrote on 06/05/2011 03:57:05 PM:
To bridge that gap will require trust bonds to be built on
both sides. Generosity with the use of the OOo mark on our
part combined with generosity from TDF regarding build/distribution
resources is just a first step in
Joe Schaefer joe_schae...@yahoo.com wrote on 06/05/2011 04:22:35 PM:
Sounds great, but so far I count only 2 committers on the
project associated with IBM. IMO you're off by a factor
or so, so claims that IBM intends to take this project
seriously will be discounted by me until that is
From: Phil Steitz phil.ste...@gmail.com
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Date: 06/05/2011 04:34 PM
Subject: Re: OpenOffice: were are we now?
On 6/5/11 11:21 AM, Niall Pemberton wrote:
We should also remember that, with Oracle abandoning OO, we are being
used to facilitate their
Jochen Wiedmann jochen.wiedm...@gmail.com wrote on 06/05/2011 04:49:20
PM:
On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 9:44 PM, robert_w...@us.ibm.com wrote:
I am puzzled by the view one open source project should not compete
against another.
And I am puzzled how you don't accept that open source
Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.com wrote on 06/05/2011 06:21:06 PM:
I personally don't need anything sorted out before the project
enters incubation. All I care about is whether the community will be
able to effectively deal with it or be blocked by it. That just
requires some idea of
Niall Pemberton niall.pember...@gmail.com wrote on 06/05/2011 06:30:06
PM:
I agree with you - in this case I think it would be better if IBM
collaborated with LibreOffice, rather than seeking to compete. But I
could be wrong.
And I support 100% your right to have that opinion and to
Niall Pemberton niall.pember...@gmail.com wrote on 06/05/2011 06:45:16
PM:
I'll lend a voice to the contrary.
I can't see why splitting a community should be a factor in entry to
the
incubator. Just about every new open source community is trying topull
away
developers from another
Greg Stein gst...@gmail.com wrote on 06/05/2011 07:44:19 PM:
On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 18:18, Simon Phipps si...@webmink.com wrote:
On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 8:44 PM, Ariel Constenla-Haile
ariel.constenla.ha...@googlemail.com wrote:
...
I don't see the MySQL Connector module there
Florian Effenberger flo...@documentfoundation.org wrote on 06/05/2011
07:52:53 PM:
Hi,
robert_w...@us.ibm.com wrote on 2011-06-06 01.48:
Give me a citation please where anyone from IBM said the preference of
Apache to TDF/OO was due only to the license?
I've been asking for reasons
Simon Phipps si...@webmink.com wrote on 06/05/2011 07:49:41 PM:
From: Simon Phipps si...@webmink.com
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Date: 06/05/2011 07:50 PM
Subject: Re: OpenOffice: were are we now?
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 12:38 AM, Richard S. Hall
he...@ungoverned.orgwrote:
I
Greg Stein gst...@gmail.com wrote on 06/05/2011 07:55:34 PM:
I just updated the proposal to provide more detail on the requested
mailing lists. Figured it would be good to discuss here.
This is what I entered into the wiki:
The following mailing lists:
oo-...@incubator.apache.org
Niall Pemberton niall.pember...@gmail.com wrote on 06/05/2011 07:58:17
PM:
No, it was my point that that they only negative to TDF/OO was the
license here:
http://markmail.org/message/w5vtsa5nbarmnqxo
But please do elaborate on why IBM prefers a new project here rather
than
acolor...@gmail.com wrote on 06/05/2011 08:07:29 PM:
OpenOffice.org official contaction is 'OOo' not 'oo' I think is enough
time
to correct these mailing lists. I wrote a more lenghty email but I think
the
discussions should be better understood by Apache admins.
+1
Since this is
Simon Phipps si...@webmink.com wrote on 06/05/2011 08:38:08 PM:
The people who will only contribute to a copyleft license (and I know
a few
OO contributors like that) will not come over this world .. so to that
extent this is a community fork and we cannot do brand sharing as
that'll
Raphael Bircher r.birc...@gmx.ch wrote on 06/05/2011 08:47:42 PM:
Because this is my first mail, I give a short introduction to myself.
I'm Raphael Bircher from Switzerland. I contribute for OOo since 5 years
as QA and in same other tecnical parts. I was involved by the migration
to
Simon Phipps si...@webmink.com wrote on 06/05/2011 09:13:24 PM:
I think it would be great for TDF have an end-user downstream
deliverable.
It would be great if anyone open source project wants to do that. It
would be great if a private company does this. It would be good of a
sa3r...@gmail.com wrote on 06/05/2011 09:01:08 PM:
Since this is question that is pervasive in the project, I'd recommend
that after this proposal is accepted, that there be a consultation
with
ASF Legal Affairs on the trademark *before* any project infrastructure
is
created.
Simon Phipps si...@webmink.com wrote on 06/05/2011 09:42:14 PM:
From: Simon Phipps si...@webmink.com
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Date: 06/05/2011 09:43 PM
Subject: Re: Legal concern: Are we getting to close ot a division
of markets conversation?
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 2:29 AM,
Simon Phipps si...@webmink.com wrote on 06/04/2011 07:43:50 AM:
On 4 Jun 2011, at 12:19, Sam Ruby ru...@intertwingly.net wrote:
LibreOffice complements anything we do here at Apache to those who
agree with the license terms under which LibreOffice is made
available. Until or
William A. Rowe Jr. wr...@rowe-clan.net wrote on 06/04/2011 12:22:31
AM:
From: William A. Rowe Jr. wr...@rowe-clan.net
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Date: 06/04/2011 12:23 AM
Subject: Re: TDF/LO, what is the art of the possible?
On 6/3/2011 7:09 PM, robert_w...@us.ibm.com wrote:
If
Ian Lynch ianrly...@gmail.com wrote on 06/04/2011 09:10:05 AM:
So there are going to be two projects because Oracle donated the code
they
own to ASF for Apache licensing. That's not ideal from many points of
view
but it is the reality. Anyone who does not want to contribute code to an
I've heard some valid concerns about hardware resources needed to build
OpenOffice. Since I just happen to know a company that is in the hardware
business, I might be able to get them to help out in this department. But
I wanted to first check on what the possibilities are on the Apache side.
Andrew Rist andrew.r...@oracle.com wrote on 06/04/2011 01:07:36 AM:
Also, besides main apps, is Oracle donating it's Oracle OOo
extensions? Such as: PDF Import, Presenter Console, WebLog Publisher,
Professional Template Packs, MySQL Connector, etc.
Our approach is to start with the
dsh daniel.hais...@googlemail.com wrote on 06/04/2011 07:53:54 AM:
Andreas,
On Sat, Jun 4, 2011 at 12:24 PM, Andreas Kuckartz a.kucka...@ping.de
wrote:
I also notice that IBM currently does not sell Lotus Symphony but
makes
binaries available for free:
Andreas Kuckartz a.kucka...@ping.de wrote on 06/04/2011 06:24:07 AM:
I am involved in both copyleft and non-copyleft projects and write this
as a member of the Open Source community in the broad sense.
Some people wrote that the only option to make OpenOffice.org /
LibreOffice code
Joe Schaefer joe_schae...@yahoo.com wrote on 06/04/2011 10:37:03 AM:
In short, just tell us what you think you need resource-wise, and we'll
work
with you to sort out the details. The Infrastructure Team is reachable
at
infrastructure@a.o, but I'm considering mentoring this podling to
sa3r...@gmail.com wrote on 06/04/2011 10:19:27 AM:
On Sat, Jun 4, 2011 at 9:42 AM, robert_w...@us.ibm.com wrote:
I've heard some valid concerns about hardware resources needed to
build
OpenOffice. Since I just happen to know a company that is in the
hardware
business, I might be able
Ross Gardler rgard...@apache.org wrote on 06/04/2011 11:59:08 AM:
Subject: Re: TDF/LO, what is the art of the possible?
I think it is relevant how the ASF would respond. Silence will be
taken as negative yet if the ASF Board were to response to such
questions without first understanding
Benson Margulies bimargul...@gmail.com wrote on 06/03/2011 08:02:25 AM:
There is a meta-question here: what are the criteria by which the IPMC
should evaluate a proposal?
1. Are there enough people on the proposal to plausibly start out?
I think everyone agrees on this as a legitimate
Michael Meeks michael.me...@novell.com wrote on 06/03/2011 10:05:31 AM:
As for continuity of OpenOffice releases, there was a full stable
release of OpenOffice in January and a preview 3.4.0 release in April.
It is very reasonable for the new ApacheOffice project to start up,
and even
Allen Pulsifer pulsi...@openoffice.org wrote on 06/03/2011 11:45:03
AM:
It is my understanding though that IBM wants to work with a project that
is
licensed under the Apache License, not the LGPL. If The Document
Foundation
is willing to change its release from the LGPL to the Apache
Norbert Thiebaud nthieb...@gmail.com wrote on 06/03/2011 11:09:23 AM:
On Fri, Jun 3, 2011 at 9:29 AM, Ross Gardler rgard...@apache.org
wrote:
This is why, inside the ASF, we expect individuals to represent the
communities interests not their commercial or their employers
interests.
I'm perceiving that we're circling around on the same points with no new
options coming up. So I'd like to record the state of the issue. If
there is consensus on this formulation, I'll place it in the wiki. Of
course, if the discussion advances the issue or positions move, I can
always go
Simon Phipps si...@webmink.com wrote on 06/03/2011 02:33:21 PM:
Your proposed text also does not recognise possibilities for
collaboration
to protect the OpenOffice consumer end-user community in the interim
while
your project sorts itself out.
Can you state this in the form of a
Greg Stein gst...@gmail.com wrote on 06/03/2011 02:57:48 PM:
On Fri, Jun 3, 2011 at 14:50, robert_w...@us.ibm.com wrote:
Greg Stein gst...@gmail.com wrote on 06/03/2011 02:27:55 PM:
Your proposed text does not cover the fact that TDF/LO can lift code
from ASF into their products.
Greg Stein gst...@gmail.com wrote on 06/03/2011 03:24:02 PM:
On Fri, Jun 3, 2011 at 15:12, robert_w...@us.ibm.com wrote:
...
This is the OpenOffice proposal, not the LO proposal. So we should be
This is the section on how we collaborate with LO, among others. I
consider that part of
I plan on updating the proposal on the wiki over the week-end. I'm going
to start a series of threads on various sections of the proposal that I
think are a bit thin and which I could use some help with.
For Relationships with Other Apache Products we currently just call out
only POI as a
This is for the proposal, the Nominated Mentors section.
My observation, after seeing the topics that seem to be getting the most
attention from the IPMC members on this list, is that in the the Podling
we will want to pay special attention to:
- IP review and remediation, due to the known
dsh daniel.hais...@googlemail.com wrote on 06/03/2011 04:11:43 PM:
Rob,
I think being more open concerning collaboration can't hurt what do
you think? So it would be nice if the proposal could be open and
diplomatic in this regards. Probably the intention should be to not
shut the door
sa3r...@gmail.com wrote on 06/03/2011 05:17:46 PM:
Rules? :-)
From http://incubator.apache.org/guides/proposal.html :
The incoming community needs to work together before presenting this
proposal to the incubator. Think about and discuss future goals and
the reasons for coming to
Greg Stein gst...@gmail.com wrote on 06/03/2011 05:42:14 PM:
So yah. I'm giving up on this for now. My suggestions are hitting a
teflon wall. But it shouldn't. Including the LO community in this
proposal should be a no-brainer. I don't think that including them by
reference [to the Apache
If someone on the list from TDF is authorized to answer this (or can get
such authorization), I'd appreciate an official stance on the following
questions. This would help us understand what room there is for
negotiation and what is not worth discussing at all.
For willing to consider it, I
Cor Nouws oo...@nouenoff.nl wrote on 06/03/2011 08:36:20 PM:
(So seeing Robs questionnaire: it won't be easy to get ground for many
positive replies. But of course it is good to try. I even might step in
with some suggestions, that however always tend to fail, since my mind
does not take
Yes, Simon, I am aware of that. But I have no standing in the IPMC to
liaise with another organization on their behalf. Jim sent a note to
their leaders, as well as OOo, and invited them to join this conversation.
Several of their Steering Committee and Engineering Steering Committee
Cor Nouws oo...@nouenoff.nl wrote on 06/03/2011 06:14:56 PM:
I would love to see all work in one big project - read all my pleas in
the OpenOffice.org time. But reality tells me that is not going to
happen.
I would like to see this as well, everyone working on a single code base.
The is
Simon Phipps si...@webmink.com wrote on 06/03/2011 06:16:22 PM:
I suggest:
The LibreOffice project is an important partner in the OpenOffice.org
community, with an established potentially highly complementary focus on
the
GNU/Linux community as well as on Windows and Mac consumer
Jim -- thanks for reaching out to the OpenOffice.org and LibreOffice
communities with your emails. This is important.
Since you've already started with the invites, I wonder if I could
recommend to you one more? Another significant party that works in the
core OpenOffice source code is
Ian Lynch ianrly...@gmail.com wrote on 06/02/2011 09:12:10 AM:
From: Ian Lynch ianrly...@gmail.com
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Date: 06/02/2011 09:12 AM
Subject: Re: OpenOffice and the ASF
On 2 June 2011 14:04, Greg Stein gst...@gmail.com wrote:
Should we add ourselfs as
Simon Brouwer simon.o...@xs4all.nl wrote on 06/02/2011 09:21:53 AM:
Should we add ourselfs as commiters?
If you would like to contribute here (possibly instead of, or in
addition, to your work at TDF), then yes! Please add yourself into the
proposal on the wiki.
I had already been so
Florian Effenberger flo...@documentfoundation.org wrote on 06/02/2011
06:39:12 AM:
This would not only be about reinventing the wheel, but also about
splitting the community, leading to disadvantages for end-users,
contributors, and enterprises.
I'd like to challenge your assertion
Jochen Wiedmann jochen.wiedm...@gmail.com wrote on 06/02/2011 10:25:20
AM:
I trust I do not need to explain at length to an Apache PMC the
relative
merits of the Apache 2.0 license or the strengths and stability of the
ASF. I'll take it as granted that this is well-known to you all.
Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com wrote on 06/02/2011 11:06:54 AM:
On Jun 2, 2011, at 10:40 AM, robert_w...@us.ibm.com wrote:
I'd like to think that no one is working on LibreOffice merely because
they have no choice, or that giving everyone a choice is seen as being
charles.h.sch...@gmail.com wrote on 06/02/2011 11:16:45 AM:
I do have a question though. To me it's unclear whether the Openoffice
project has any real development ressources. I see so far one developer
and
Rob, who I know to be a distinguished engineer from IBM but who has
never
Yegor Kozlov yegor.koz...@dinom.ru wrote on 06/02/2011 01:36:52 PM:
I can't speak for the whole project, but personally I'd be interested
in
discussing how the POI mission statement could be expanded, and if
that'd
work well for everyone.
On the web site we say that the Apache POI
Florian Effenberger flo...@documentfoundation.org wrote on 06/02/2011
03:01:26 PM:
Hello,
as we have a public holiday in Germany, I will reply to the other
messages tomorrow. However, I cannot leave this sentence uncommented:
Noel J. Bergman wrote on 2011-06-02 20.50:
If there is a
charles.h.sch...@gmail.com wrote on 06/02/2011 02:42:11 PM:
No Rob, I don't question your credentials, have not done that, will
never
done that. Both of us know better than having that kind of talk, both of
us
have worked together for years now, at the OASIS and elsewhere. What I'm
dsh daniel.hais...@googlemail.com wrote on 06/02/2011 04:05:38 PM:
IMHO you should not discuss or question the LO community size
respective its vitality in any way at this place. That's certainly not
the scope of the OpenOffice Apache incubation proposal anyway. The
I disagree. The
dsh daniel.hais...@googlemail.com wrote on 06/02/2011 04:44:26 PM:
IMHO the project is on track the community just needs to discuss
some more things and sort them out. It is just that I don't even think
it's required to provide proof-points based on questionable
analytics at this point in
Greg Stein gst...@gmail.com wrote on 06/02/2011 05:45:57 PM:
On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 16:55, robert_w...@us.ibm.com wrote:
dsh daniel.hais...@googlemail.com wrote on 06/02/2011 04:44:26 PM:
IMHO the project is on track the community just needs to discuss
some more things and sort them
Simon Phipps si...@webmink.com wrote on 06/02/2011 08:12:40 PM:
2. This incubator project, which sets out to be the Firefox of
OpenOffice, should proceed pretty much as described, but under a
name other than OpenOffice (just as Firefox got a different name).
Something like Apache ODF
William A. Rowe Jr. wr...@rowe-clan.net wrote on 06/02/2011 03:22:24
PM:
On 02/06/2011 16:22, Jim Jagielski wrote:
The initial list has grown and I expect it to continue to; up
until it was announced, no one new about it, so it was kinda
impossible to get a more comprehensive list. Now
Michael Meeks michael.me...@novell.com wrote on 06/02/2011 08:57:27 PM:
-$scripts_dir/merge-log -p LIBREOFFICE_CREATE.. $outdir/all-lo.log
+$scripts_dir/merge-log --all --since='2011-01-03'
$outdir/all-lo.log
Show 'active' contributors by affiliation - ie. at least one patch
Niall Pemberton niall.pember...@gmail.com wrote on 06/02/2011 09:07:31
PM:
The Required Resources section of the proposal is pretty
minimalistic listing only two mailing lists, JIRA, Subversion
download site. While it is not necessary IMO to detail all
requirements prior to accepting the
Jukka Zitting jukka.zitt...@gmail.com wrote on 06/01/2011 12:13:09 PM:
Community
OpenOffice.org. seeks to further encourage developer and user
communities
during incubation, beyond the existing developers currently working on
the
project.
Any thoughts on how (or if) the
Nick Burch nick.bu...@alfresco.com wrote on 06/01/2011 01:48:49 PM:
Speaking personally, I would be interested in seeing how ODF Toolkit
could
fit within the POI project. We already have a number of components, and
interfaces that try to smooth over the differences between the different
Ross Gardler rgard...@apache.org wrote on 06/01/2011 12:21:23 PM:
There are only two initial committers identified in the proposal. Why
only two for such a large codebase?
We could have put a much longer list of IBM names on this list, developers
familiar with the code base via their
dsh daniel.hais...@googlemail.com wrote on 06/01/2011 02:16:58 PM:
To me the proof point whether this proposal will be successful or not
is whether Linux distributions having already dropped support for
OpenOffice and switched to LibreOffice instead would be willing to
reverse that decision
Ross Gardler rgard...@apache.org wrote on 06/01/2011 12:52:46 PM:
I think it would be really good to have this goal in the proposal
itself, it is something concrete to point to from a community
development point of view.
Thanks, Ross. I've updated the community section of the proposal
Alexei Fedotov alexei.fedo...@gmail.com wrote on 06/01/2011 01:38:43 PM:
OpenOffice is used in our product [1] we want to submit to the
incubator. We promised to show that we can gradually clean up LGPL
from the code and were working on that [2]. We'd have one less
head-ache with OO under
sa3r...@gmail.com wrote on 06/01/2011 10:36:39 PM:
Hi all -
I see that I'm listed as a sponsor. Can you please remove my name
and replace with someone else? I never agreed to sponsor this.
I've removed your name.
What am I missing here?
According to the Incubation Policy [1]:
A
Jochen Wiedmann jochen.wiedm...@gmail.com wrote on 06/01/2011 02:56:10
PM:
We could have put a much longer list of IBM names on this list,
developers
familiar with the code base via their work on Lotus Symphony (which is
our
OpenOffice based project). But then we could have been
William A. Rowe Jr. wr...@rowe-clan.net wrote on 06/01/2011 03:01:50
PM:
What is a more serious question, how many bug fixes would go into
LibreOffice without being offered to the ASF under the AL? LO has no
copyright assignment, so the principals of LO don't have the flexibility
to offer
Ross Gardler rgard...@apache.org wrote on 06/01/2011 06:03:09 PM:
There are only two initial committers identified in the proposal. Why
only two for such a large codebase?
We could have put a much longer list of IBM names on this list,
developers
familiar with the code base via
Louis Suarez-Potts lsuarezpo...@gmail.com wrote on 06/01/2011 09:41:08
PM:
* Apache Foundation owns the trademark to OOo?
* We at OOo receive lots of requests to use it for mostly good
purposes. We grant these, with minimal fuss and have set up systems
to do that more efficiently. With
Dumb question. Are we obligated to converse like this, in a single email
thread, for the duration of the proposal review process? Is this an
organizing principle? Would I break anything if I created threads,
perhaps prefixed in a consistent way, like OpenOffice Proposal: Topic
Foo?
-Rob
99 matches
Mail list logo
