On 04/11/10 11.26, Gianluca Turconi wrote:
It would be enough a code repository and a technical committee composed by most important/best respected contributors.
A software project of the size of a productivity suite is not just about software, but is about maintaining relationships with different stakeholders, participating in committees and industry bodies (like OASIS), marketing, etcetera.
In addition, it is about creating the ecosystem that has been sorely missing around OOo (certification of developers, integrators, trainers and users). Free software projects cannot survive if there is not the structure necessary to generate added value (and revenues).
Copyright assignment is just one of the problems, and is connected to the vision of a foundation supported by corporate sponsors (which I do not support fully, in the sense that corporate sponsors - at least the corporate sponsors which I can think of - usually want a total control of the structure: think Oracle with OOo, and the respect of the OOo community they have demonstrated).
There is much more in the legal entity than copyright assignment, and at the moment - in my very personal and humble opinion - we miss the rest more than the CA.
Ciao, Italo -- Italo Vignoli [email protected] Mobile +39.348.5653829 VoIP: +39.02.320621813 Skype: italovignoli -- Unsubscribe instructions: Email to [email protected] Posting guidelines: http://netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived ***
