Dear Rob,
Am 17.06.2011 21:49, schrieb Rob Weir:
On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 2:55 PM, Manfred A. Reiter<[email protected]>wrote:
Can you understand, that due to the nature of OOo it always
had very strong language specific communities, wich significantly
contributed to the huge success of OOo?
Interfering with the habits and cultures established within these
communties will in fact not take you any further than somebody
can say "we obeyed the Apache standard rules".
The power of local communites which can act independently,
has proven to be especially usefull in these areas were competing
products simply couldn't offer a "consumer focused" localised solution.
I'm just worried that you will alienate some very active contributors
by enforcing PMC rules just ... "because ..."
For things that impact the product release, things like code contributions,
documentation, translations, etc., things that actually could make the bits
and bytes of the release different, I think it is very important that these
pieces are done in Apache. And by being in the Apache project, they are
covered by the Apache 2.0 license and by our consensus decision making
process.
never questioned that.
IF a spelling mistake and a correction of the same in <Klingon - or your
favorite language> is actually core development, that needs to be
covered by a full blown PMC
then you probably need a round of refactoring in the core ;-).
For the activities that do not impact the actual contents of the release,
things like user support, country- or language-specific marketing activities
and so on, for these I could see other models working as well.
you got it!
Remember,
with any Apache project, anyone is free to take the project's source code,
translate it, build it and market it or even sell it. This could be done
with modifications and enhancements. This is all possible under the Apache
2.0 license, whether you participate in the project or not.
ack
So if there are existing groups that do such activities under Sun/Oracle
OpenOffice.org, then they can continue to do so, by using Apache OpenOffice.
But when we start talking about the Apache project, then we are not talking
about "groups" joining. We're talking about individuals joining.
got that during last discussions ;-)
I don't
think we want to have independent, autonomous groups within an Apache
project.
neither do I
But I wonder whether one solution is this:
1) Strong existing language projects continue to operate independently,
according to their own rules.
exactly my point
2) They ensure that their work is all done under Apache 2.0 license so it is
usable by Apache OpenOffice as well as by LibreOffice
3) Language projects each appoint at least one member to join the Apache
OpenOffice project as a liaison.
that could do the trick ...
but I would avoid to force grown and working communities
under a gonvernance process they don't need.
I would also avoid to deny those language projects to be
seperated from Apache.org ... in other words /home should
be at lang-klingon.ooo.apache.org and not oooinklingon.org
that will cause confusion, and is not very smart marketingwise.
cheers
Manfred
