There's to many conspiracy theories around here. Lets examine the facts.
IBM told this community of it's intent to donate Symphony code in July 2011. They *offered* it, they did not demand it be accepted. It was broadly welcomed. A couple of weeks ago they made an announcement. They did not announce AOO 4, they announced the closing of their fork of AOO. That is an IBM business decicision and this community has no right to demand influence over that internal decision. The OOo community has been complaining that IBM have a fork. Now some are complaining they are closing the fork. The world has a complex and varied set of opinions. IBM did not announce AOO 4. They did show a *proposal* for the look and feel of AOO 4. This should be no surprise since the donation of the Symphony code offered in July explicitly included the UI changes. Again some indicated their pleasure at this. IBM are not members of this community. Individuals are. No member of the community can force a decision here. Anyone can object to any code contribution, if they have good reason and a valid alternative. IBM know this. IBM have done nothing wrong here. In fact they have gone to great lengths to ensure they operate within the Apache way. As a mentor I have no concerns about their actions to date. As a mentor I am watching carefully. There is plenty of space for the community to participate and to object to specific actions. However, complaining about the fact that IBM want to donate significant resources to the project is wasteful in so many ways I cannot count them. Save the energy for when you want to object to something specific rather than some imagined secret plan. When you do want to object to an unacceptable code contribution be assured the processes we adopt around here will ensure your voice is heard. See my "Be lazy, be fast" post at http://j.mp/x1tSUk for more on how this works. Ross Sent from my mobile device, please forgive errors and brevity. On Jan 19, 2012 8:25 PM, "Donald Harbison" <dpharbi...@gmail.com> wrote:
