On Fri, 2011-06-17 at 13:18 +0000, Charles-H. Schulz wrote: > Le Fri, 17 Jun 2011 06:34:48 -0400, > drew <d...@baseanswers.com> a écrit : > > > On Fri, 2011-06-17 at 10:53 +0200, Charles-H. Schulz wrote: > > > Hello Martin, > > > > > > Answering to the discuss AT TDF list as I'm not subscribed to the > > > other ones... > > > > > > > > > Le Thu, 16 Jun 2011 18:39:54 +0200, > > > Martin Hollmichel <martin.hollmic...@googlemail.com> a écrit : > > > > > > > Hi Sam, > > > > > Do you have a concrete proposal? > > > > yes, I have. > > > > > > > > First, I do not have any problems with the Apache style of > > > > decision making, lazy consensus sounds perfectly reasonable to > > > > me. I like that style. This fits perfectly to the "meritocracy" > > > > principle. > > > > > > > > My understanding is, that this principle is based on > > > > * contributing individuals > > > > * organizations/institutions contributing developers and/or money > > > > for the infrastructure/governance, these organizations contribute > > > > because they have derived products or other business around the > > > > regarding software. So users are represented in this model by own > > > > work power or indirectly by companies. > > > > This principle has been proven to work quite well for many open > > > > source projects. > > > > > > > > I think this principle may get enhanced by enabling a non profit > > > > organization to have their own resources on a project (This might > > > > fit into the Apache philosophy considering this organization as an > > > > contributing institution). I think this is necessary because > > > > there is already a lot of business happening around OpenOffice, > > > > but most of these businesses are just to small or have not the > > > > right expertise to execute on the "meritocracy" principle. > > > > So what the OOo project missed most was to have a path to get > > > > product feature or tasks done (or just 4th level support) with > > > > the help of money offered. > > > > > > > > So my proposal is continue project decisions the Apache Style but > > > > also to find a framework to make product decisions in a manner > > > > that also the concerns of Users, local communities, QA, business > > > > partners, etc. get honored. This framework also should enable to > > > > collect money so that development (committer) resources can be > > > > found to get the issues addressed in an equitable process. > > > > > > > > We already have thousands of feature requests and enhancements in > > > > the queue, we are putting a new bunch of requirements on top of > > > > it through the current transition to Apache, I think we should > > > > seek the power of _all_ OOo communities, users and businesses to > > > > achieve significant growth to make OOo a better and successful > > > > product. And I did not even included wishes like ODF Viewers, > > > > mobile and Cloud services around OOo. > > > > > > > > My offer is to develop (with all concerned parties) a new charter > > > > for all the groups mentioned above (as a successor of the > > > > Community Council Charter) and enable the project to have own > > > > development resources. The non profit organization Team > > > > OpenOffice.org e.V. played in the past just the role of being the > > > > cash box of the CC in a quite defensive way > > > > (http://download.openoffice.org/contribute.html, will you find > > > > the path to donate ??), now Team OOo is preparing to offer a link > > > > between business, communities, users and developers to enable > > > > growth on the new futile ground we are now moving on. > > > > > > > > > If I understand well your proposal concerns as well the LibreOffice > > > project. The principles you have outlined above are very much the > > > same ones the Document Foundation has been advocating and > > > implementing. > > > > > > In this respect we would welcome working with Team OOo (and other > > > NGOs) You are also right to stress on the need to work on a charter > > > for all the NGOs, > > > > Hi Charles, > > > > I did not read that in his remarks. > > I sort of read that actually , but I might be mistaken, I'd welcome some > clarification here indeed. > > > > > > and this is somewhere on our task list here. > > > > People in other countries are capable of directing their own affairs, > > I would think. Unless you are thinking of creating franchises, is that > > your goal? > > oh I was certainly not suggesting otherwise; but I have specific > requests from local NGOs asking for a more formal document and > relations with TDF, hence the term "charter".
Hi Charles, Alright that makes a bit more sense to me, so it isn't a charter for them but guidelines for us that you are discussing? Best wishes, Drew -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
