On 10/13/2011 06:49 AM, Shane Curcuru wrote:
On 10/13/2011 9:18 AM, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
...
Juergen Schmidt may be able to provide more insight here when he can
catch
up to the list as he was a member of the CC.
i don't really want to comment on this because of my history. The general
idea and intention of the CC was good but in practise in was never
able to
operate or run in the way it should. So let us focus on finding our
own new
way...
I am sure that over time we will find a way that is Apache conform and
that
will reflect the way how we work here. Some kind of governance will
establish automatically in different areas. We will trust people who have
shown expertise in development and code questions, the same for people
who
focus on documentation, on marketing, QA etc. We will simply trust
lets call
it working groups and will correct things if necessary or something
fails.
Apologies: I think I was unclear in my original note, as several replies
seem to show.
I have no interest in replicating any previous governance structures, or
even necessarily using them as models in future governance. The Apache
PMC structure (here, a Podling PMC) is already well defined, both in
general across Apache projects and in specific here within the Apache
OOo podling.
In particular, factors like the inherent corporate control in many
previous OOo governance structures is something that is explicitly
forbidden at Apache. Likewise, the multiplicity of separate governance
communities (as it seems the various projects had, at least to my
untrained eye) is also something that is not part of the Apache Way.
Similarly, while Apache projects strive to use consensus to drive
projects forward, there is also a clear set of rules for [VOTE]ing to
ensure that formal and binding decisions are made in a timely manner.
Shane--
I think you've probably got as much of an answer as anyone here can give
-- well save a few (Marcus, Martin) -- based on your research on the web
site, the Community Council and the ESR. In addition to these two
groups, from my recollection, were the actual "project leads" (PLs) that
fed into this process -- from which, supposedly, the 3 “Product
Development Representatives” were chosen.
see
http://council.openoffice.org/councilcharter12.html
At what time I was a project lead but never a member of the council.
Louis S-P, the head of the project, was always pretty good about
communicating things to the PLs as I recall, and of course, at any time,
we could always contact him.
As far as the use of the "brand" and other information, this the only
relevant page I've come across...
http://about.openoffice.org/index.html#logo
Much of it has to do wiht the use of the logo and other graphical
elements, but this particular sentence is interesting---
"To ensure the use to the benefit of the project and in support for the
product we protect our name and our brand elements, especially the
official logo. OpenOffice.org and the OpenOffice.org logo are trademarks
or registered trademarks of Oracle and/or its affiliates."
I'm not a legal eagle , but I would say any entity that in some way
contains the string "OpenOffice.org" would be subject to trademark
restrictions/requirements, etc.
To be specific, we have a PPMC that runs the Apache OOo project, and
effectively will be managing the openoffice.org domain and brands. While
various committers here may work in groups or on various Apache mailing
lists to move the project forward, the PPMC is the governing body. This
fairly flat governance model is definitely a change for those who may
have experience with working in OOo in the past.
For those who haven't read it, here's an essay I wrote which I think
would be valuable for people concerned about the independence of PMC
governance here at Apache:
http://communityovercode.com/2011/05/apache-projects-are-independent/
In any case, I was just curious as to what the previous structures were
so I can understand them better, and hopefully be better prepared to
explain to people what has happened in the OpenOffice.org "world".
Sorry if anyone mistook my query to think that I was interested in
replicating any past governance structures - I assure you, I am not.
- Shane
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
MzK
"There is no such thing as coincidence."
-- Leroy Jethro Gibbs, Rule #39
