Forgot my footnote: [1] https://blogs.apache.org/OOo/entry/what_is_a_podling
On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 9:41 AM, Donald Harbison <[email protected]>wrote: > > > On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 5:02 AM, Martin Hollmichel < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> Wether to stay with OpenOffice or LibreOffice or to migrate to LibreOffice >> or to OpenOffce is a question in the recent past often occurred, by users, >> by people doing business with OpenOffice, by the press. The answer I would >> like to give is that this question is not really that relevant because there >> is a roadmap in place and both projects plan to stay close together. >> >> I suggest following actions: >> >> * A call to LibreOffice contributors also to contribute their changes to >> Apache as the ASF is the long desired independent foundation for >> OpenOffice.org. On this basis a collaboration among the OpenOffice.org >> Apache Project and TDF can be achieved and duplication of efforts get >> avoided. As a result the question which project/product to choose is not >> that important any more. >> >> * Provide an OpenOffice.org 3.3.1 micro release showing the world that >> OpenOffice.org continues to move (assuming that an production stable 3.4 >> release is not ready to get happen within the next months), this release >> should include a prominent statement to show the upcoming roadmap with the >> next releases. This 3.3.x release may not comply with the ASF standards but >> is an ideal vehicle for doing communication and elaborate on the transition >> from the old to the new environment. >> > The focus of the PPMC is aiming to speed towards an Apache 3.4 release, > meeting ASF release guidelines. Yes, there is some work to move through the > 3rd party code and resolve the issues. I covered this briefly in my blog > post.[1] > > Spending time on a 3.3.1 'micro-release' doesn't do much except consume > resources. It would be far preferable to focus our resources as a team on > the Apache 3.4 release effort, IMHO. > >> >> * Work on a model or agreement where user donations specific to the >> project can be continued. This is not only a matter for the ASF (and Team >> OOo), but for the overall community and we need to find ways to include them >> (including TDF) into this discussion. It is required that we have a clear >> communication on how donations will benefit the project and to provide >> transparency on the execution. A donation model shall give users a more >> direct possibility to influence the further development of the product >> without the filtering by own interests of a profit orientated organization. >> We need to include the expertise of people doing business with OpenOffice >> into this approach, so doing this discussion also on >> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]**>might makes >> sense. The employment of full time developers sponsored and directed by the >> community is IHMO a very good chance and would be examplary for the bigger >> opensource projects. I think this model is already to be proven as working >> fine for small OS projects and we now got that chance to introduce this also >> for OpenOffice.org. >> > > It may be best to start a [DISCUUSS] thread on this. Shane will advise on > proper use of Apache marks and branding. He has already advised you on the > imminent change in mail list infrastructure. You could open the discussion > here on ooo-dev, since there are TDF folks here already. It will be > challenging to broker a model that will be satisfactory to both TDF and the > AOOo project communities. Funding to support LibreOffice developers will not > benefit the AOOo project unless the developer(s) see fit to sign an ICLA and > provide the patches within ASF guidelines. This has the potential to benefit > both projects, but there has been little evident support for this approach > from the LibreOffice developer(s) to date. > >> >> Martin >> >> PS: I intentionally leave out the Apache vs. GNU license paradigm in these >> thoughts, assuming that this not the point for most users using product and >> discussion about this topic are quite predictable. > > > >> ost users at the consumer level do not have a strong view on the license >> of the sofware. This is not the case for some large enterprises. Re-opening >> the license debate will not be productive. There are many past threads on >> this in the archive already. > > >
