On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 2:53 PM, Rob Weir <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 9:30 AM, Simon Phipps <[email protected]> wrote: > > > So: > > > > * I suggest we review realistically what binaries (platforms and > languages) > > can be sustained once the project is fully operational, seeking named > > participants to take responsibility for each of them, and then > collaborate > > with other projects to ensure that the user community continues to be > fully > > served. It may be too early for this discussion. > > > > Apache projects tend to avoid carving out designated ownership of > sub-project areas. That tends to degrade into territorial behavior > that is anti-collaboration and anti-community. Although a person may > take the lead on building the Windows port for a particular release, > this is done without assumption that someone else might also work in > that area. So I don't think we will have named/designated "owners" > for various platforms. The project owns the release. The > responsibility is with the PPMC. > > That said, I believe we already have volunteers on board who have > expressed interest in supporting all platforms that OOo has, except > Solaris. > All platform/language combinations? Do you have a pointer to the list pelase? > > If anyone wants to collaborate on Solaris, please speak up. > > > * I suggest that end-users should be supported by shared forums or a > > GetSatisfaction-style collaborative venue serving all OpenOffice-family > > projects, hosted on the OpenOffice.org domain so it's easy to find. This > > discussion is already in progress and my suggestion is a rough summary of > > possible consensus. > > > > We're already doing that today on the OOo support forums, yes? Are > you proposing something different than that? > This is the conversation that's in progress, about mailing lists needing migration from Oracle infrastructure; I had assumed you were following it. S.
