On 28/11/2012 janI wrote:
I have had a look, and the tool does with a few exceptions, what genLang
was supposed to do. There are no reason to make parallel developments so
the l10n development has been stopped.
Reading the description it seems it can be used as a basis to improve
the Apache OpenOffice localization process too. As others already
pointed out in this discussion, there are some good arguments for making
a stand-alone project out of this tool, and this seems a reasonable
solution.
Would it not be a wonderful world, if openSource was truly open and we
could share ... why are we
as volunteers not trying harder to reach that goal.
How much harder? I think it's hard to try harder. Three recent examples,
all coming from the official Apache blog or consensus on mailing lists:
- our FOSDEM offer to share a devroom:
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-ooo-dev/201210.mbox/%3c50904023.6050...@apache.org%3E
- my ApacheCon presentation
http://s.apache.org/openoffice-aceu2012-day-1
- code contributions Apache OpenOffice is making to LibreOffice
https://blogs.apache.org/OOo/entry/good_news_libreoffice_is_integrating
So the Apache OpenOffice side did show willingness to cooperate. But
cooperation needs willingness on both sides.
If I were PMC I would have one high priority on my list
I quite disagree on two points here:
1) You seem to believe Apache OpenOffice is not seeing this as high
priority, while I believe Apache OpenOffice is really the only active
party in this discussion.
2) You imply that only PMC members can make a change. This is not true.
Not being a committer may prevent a contributor from getting things
done, but not being a PMC member does not prevent anyone from being
heard or influential.
Regards,
Andrea.
