Hi Don, all,
Am 17.11.2011 15:34, schrieb Donald Harbison:
On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 9:14 AM, Stefan Taxhet<[email protected]> wrote:
Am 17.11.2011 02:23, schrieb Rob Weir:
This topic sounds important, so I'm moving it to its own thread.
OK, let's talk about a maintenance release first; but at some point we
could broaden the scope to releases of Apache OpenOffice too.
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 11:56 AM, Martin Hollmichel
<martin.hollmichel@googlemail.**com<[email protected]>>
wrote:
removal of the Oracle branding is the easy part. As said before, having a
joint messaging with ASF about this release and the future releases is
some
work to do. Adopting references from old OpenOffice.org instances
(forums,
mailing lists, issue tracking) to the new ones in the ReadMe File is
another
issue we are still working on.
It is hard to think about a joint message when we know almost nothing
about what you are doing. What we're doing here at Apache is clear --
you see our mailing lists, wiki, SVN repository, etc. It is all very
open and transparent.
Do you have a mailing list or something that we can subscribe to?
Could you say a little about what your short term and longer term
goals are?
Martin and others mentioned that there is a need to show a sign of life to
OpenOffice.org users.
Do you agree that Apache OpenOffice, the project and the future product is
sufficient to 'show sign of life' to users? If not, why not?
I think the project Apache OpenOffice and a release filling the gap
between OOo 3.3.0 and future product releases are required.
The schedule people are used to listed 3.x releases (minor) every 6
month with micro/bugfix releases (3.x.y) after 3 month in between.
This means that we are more than overdue since the 3.3.0 release in
January 2011. So an interim release of improved bits and bytes together
with a description of the work towards "the future product" could
convince people much more than an optimistic perspective of future
achievements.
For us short term goals are to (re)gain confidence in OpenOffice.org
and support for the existing user base. We think this requires a release
rather soon; and we don't see a conflict but a complement with work going
on in the project here.
What is your proposal for the name of your release? Please make a proposal
for what you wish to name your release.
Rob described the two options very concise. The preference would be to
release "OpenOffice.org 3.3.1" with consent of the home of development
work for future releases.
Long term we want to further sustainable development work. This will
result in a reliable product that is improved and delivered at regular
intervals. We see such a product as the basis for ongoing business.
Does Team OpenOffice.org e.V. plan to do their 'sustainable work' within
the Apache OpenOffice project? If so, Team OpenOffice.org will have the
ability to build binary distributions for release under the AL2 license for
ongoing business.
Yes, that's what one could envision. This discussion has been postponed
after the resolution of the current topic. And my understanding is that
this is not going to be happen this year.
We encourage you to present a more complete proposal for discussion. This
is a start.
I got this message from Rob's post (which I hope to address here too).
Please give some hints which questions should be covered by the proposal
and we'll prepare a request.
Greetings
Stefan
Thanks.
We are comfortable about continuing the talk here on this list. I
would appreciate if we come to a picture that satisfies users, the project
and the participants.
Likewise, I personally welcome you and your TO e.V. colleagues to more
actively join and participate in a positive and productive discussion on
this list.
Greetings
Stefan
-Rob
The coding work we've done in the 3.3.1 is about some security and
bugfixing
issues,
Martin
