On Mon, Oct 18, 2010 04:48:23 AM +0200, Ramon Sole
(ramon.s...@opscons.com) wrote:
> Both communities will be able to collaborate in tons of things, but
> the project leaders can't share responsabilities in both projects.
> If so, why to have two Communities? You can't fork a open source
> project and keep your responsabilities in the original one! It's
> astonishing just trying to do it.
Thanks Ramon. You've summed up better than I could the two reasons that
(without me being even completely aware of them) made me ask the
question that started this thread.
I was surprised seeing people who started TDF continuing to keep their
OOo hats (1). And much more surprised to see all these "surprised"
reactions to Oracle's "resignment" actions. I mean, I would have said
that if there's anything surprising in that is ONLY the fact that it
took so long. I'd assume that it took Oracle managers no more than 20
seconds after the initial TDF announcement to decide they wanted to do
it, and Oracle lawyers much less than 20 days to decide if they could
get away with it.
I really don't know if there are other people today that still have
any official role in both communities, OOo and TDF (or that have
official roles only in OOo but have formally, publicly approved
TDF). But if there are such people, I'm very interested to hear if
they plan to resign before being "resigned", and above all their
general opinion about what Ramon said and on how to handle the
OOo/Oracle <-> LibO/TDF relation in the future.
thanks,
M. Fioretti
http://stop.zona-m.net
(1) the intrinsical *validity* of the reasons that caused the creation
of TDF are a totally separate issue, at least for me!
--
E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org for instructions on how to
unsubscribe
List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be
deleted
