Re: [board-discuss] request for vacation
Hi :) Doesn't that count as TDF sending you to a conference? Therefore it's part of your job to attend these sorts of things? Presumably some of the time you might be working with other projects or your own things rather than representing TDF all the time so only the regular hours count, not 24/7. I'm just curious tbh. Regards from Tom :) From: Florian Effenberger flo...@documentfoundation.org To: board-discuss@documentfoundation.org Sent: Monday, 13 May 2013, 7:40 Subject: [board-discuss] request for vacation Dear board, next week, I'd like to attend LinuxTag in Berlin, and therefore would like to file a request for vacation for four days: from Tuesday, May 21st to Friday, May 24th. There are two more events in the future I'd like to attend where I also plan to file a request for vacation, as soon as I know the exact travel dates. One is the LibreOffice Conference, where I estimatedly plan to be from Monday, September 23rd to Friday, September 27th. The other event is CONSEGI in Brazil, where I estimatedly plan to be from Monday, August 12th, to Friday, August 16th. Note that August 15th is a public holiday. For the latter two events, I will file my concrete request in time when I have the exact travel dates, but for LinuxTag, if there are no objections, I'd like to ask Thorsten to file that accordingly with the payroll provider. Thank you very much, Florian -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: board-discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [board-discuss] LibreOffice Swag/Merchandise Bulk Purchase?
Hi :) That 40 sounds bizzare. Some have already claimed more than that on travel without being even slightly dishonourable. Far from it in fact, they seem to have gone to extraordinary pains to keep costs down and i really can't imagine people in other organisations going that far. It's an unworkable amount and must have some provisions to allow for reality?!!? Surely the normal way would be for TDF to buy in bulk, obtaining a massive discount due to that, and then sell on to individuals or groups at more than TDF paid per item. Groups often do that sort of thing so that individuals pay less than they would have to if they bought the single item for themselves. The group gets a tiny profit and hopefully enough to cover any losses for items that go unsold and wastage, admin, postage, other overheads with some change left over. The problem might be at what point that gets considered Trading and whether that is allowed. Regards from Tom :) From: Robinson Tryon bishop.robin...@gmail.com To: Joel Madero jmadero@gmail.com Cc: Florian Effenberger flo...@documentfoundation.org; Michael Meeks michael.me...@suse.com; market...@us.libreoffice.org; board-discuss@documentfoundation.org; libreoffice-dev libreoff...@lists.freedesktop.org Sent: Thursday, 28 March 2013, 18:37 Subject: Re: [board-discuss] LibreOffice Swag/Merchandise Bulk Purchase? On Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at 2:29 PM, Joel Madero jmadero@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at 11:22 AM, Florian Effenberger flo...@documentfoundation.org wrote: Hi, Michael Meeks wrote on 2013-03-28 12:56: The stop energy has already reached epic proportions here:-) The plan is to encourage SPI to fund this - which should be no issue. sure, that would be no issue then. :) So if I'm reading this right, even if we combine with an event that we need LibreOffice gear, we can't use that gear as a prize and therefor TDF cannot be involved at all? If this is the case I'll plan on going through SPI which is cool but will be unfortunate in the sense that we could spend more than necessary as a bulk order may cut cost substantially. I think it would be perfectly fine for an individual to place an bulk order for 50 T-shirts, and then have SPI buy 20 of them, TDF buy 20 more, and have a few individuals buy 1 or 2 each. As long as we keep our noses clean and make sure that... 1) We get the organizations/individuals to pre-order the merchandise 2) We don't spend more than 40 € of TDF's money per year, per person 3) We make sure to deliver the merchandise once it arrives ...then I think that we should be okay. At least that's how I understand the situation, anyhow :-) Cheers, --R
Re: [board-discuss] additional FOSDEM budget
Hi :) Hopefully these costs will go up quite dramatically every year because it's an indicator of success. It's going up because we know that a LOT more people will be stopping and taking an interest in TDF and LibreOffice at the event (and at other events). Also hopefully more people might be happy to don the tshirts and mingle to raise the profile even more. Regards from Tom :) From: Florian Effenberger flo...@documentfoundation.org To: board-discuss@documentfoundation.org Sent: Tuesday, 29 January 2013, 13:19 Subject: Re: [board-discuss] additional FOSDEM budget +1 from my side, of course as well Florian Effenberger wrote on 2013-01-28 12:43: Hello, the board has previously approved [1] 2.000 € for FOSDEM collaterals. Because we would like to opt for higher quality t-shirts, plus produce some stickers in addition, I'd like to ask the board to approve an additional 600 € for collaterals. Although the amount sounds rather high, we try to give away t-shirts at FOSDEM for donations to get some return money, plus t-shirts not sold will be taken to other trade shows. Florian [1] 20130109-01 on https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/TDF/BoD_Decisions
Re: [board-discuss] Format of the BoD votes announcement
Hi :) I think just the vote count is fine. If people want more info they can look through the appropriate thread. I do quite like the idea of a list of names as a way of people checking they were counted correctly but there are times when a vote needs to be taken anonymously. So, on balance i'm quite happy without names. Regards from Tom :) From: Florian Effenberger flo...@documentfoundation.org To: board-discuss@documentfoundation.org Sent: Wednesday, 2 January 2013, 8:38 Subject: Re: [board-discuss] Format of the BoD votes announcement Hi Norbert, Norbert Thiebaud wrote on 2012-12-21 14:40: I'd like to suggest that the summary of the BoD vote as exemplified below be slightly changed to included nominative informations relative the the vote. [..] Result of vote: 3 approvals: John, Robert, Caroline 0 neutral 1 disapprovals. Phillip it makes sense to me, and from my side, we can start by doing so with the very first minutes in 2013. It also helps in counting votes properly, if we need to explicitly state the names of the voters. Maybe we can even add the opinions of those who are participating, but not formally allowed to vote (e.g. the audience or deputies not representing anyone). It helps giving an impression of the overall opinion. Any thoughts from someone else? Florian -- Florian Effenberger, Chairman of the Board (Vorstandsvorsitzender) Tel: +49 8341 99660880 | Mobile: +49 151 14424108 Jabber: flo...@jabber.org | SIP: flo...@iptel.org The Document Foundation, Zimmerstr. 69, 10117 Berlin, Germany Gemeinnützige rechtsfähige Stiftung des bürgerlichen Rechts Legal details: http://www.documentfoundation.org/imprint
Re: [board-discuss] Seeking approval for server procurement
Hi :) +1 Ok, i am not a voting member but the options here seem to be 1. accept the donation and get an asset that might be useful (probably will be enormously useful) 2. hand back the dosh So i am not really clear why it's even up for discussion or voting on but i guess it's good policy jic it leads to further unexpected expenses or other problems (which seems very unlikely). Regards from Tom :) --- On Wed, 11/1/12, Thorsten Behrens t...@documentfoundation.org wrote: From: Thorsten Behrens t...@documentfoundation.org Subject: [board-discuss] Seeking approval for server procurement To: board-discuss@documentfoundation.org Date: Wednesday, 11 January, 2012, 11:31 Hi *, TDF has received a generous, targetted donation of $3000 to procure a rack-mountable server, dedicated for dev-related workloads, e.g. tinderbox builds. One of our sponsoring companies is offering for-free hosting, such that this is a one-off spending. I hereby request the board to approve the purchase of a suitable box, for up to $3000. Regards, -- Thorsten -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to board-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to board-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [board-discuss] FOSDEM travel funding
Hi :) Blimey!! Given the work you do here i hope the BoD is able to stump-up the extra 100 to save you the 8hours journey!! It'd be more cost-effective to get you the shorter flight so that you are not worn out (at either end) by the trip! Regards from Tom :) --- On Mon, 9/1/12, Florian Effenberger flo...@documentfoundation.org wrote: From: Florian Effenberger flo...@documentfoundation.org Subject: Re: [board-discuss] FOSDEM travel funding To: board-discuss@documentfoundation.org Date: Monday, 9 January, 2012, 15:54 Hi, Florian Effenberger wrote on 2012-01-09 16:52: Going via train is about 8,5 hours, but available for approximately 200 €. Still rather expensive, but the cheapest I can get. I plan to arrive on the 3th and leave on the 5th, so depending on the hotel costs, I guess I need funding of not more than 400 €. oh, and before someone slams me: Of course I do not plan to sleep in a room for 100 € per night. ;-) I'd just like to have some reserve planned in without voting again, in case something is more expensive than planned. Normally, a decent hotel room should be doable for about 50-75 € per night. Florian -- Florian Effenberger flo...@documentfoundation.org Board of Directors at The Document Foundation Tel: +49 8341 99660880 | Mobile: +49 151 14424108 Skype: floeff | Twitter/Identi.ca: @floeff -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to board-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to board-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [board-discuss] New members
Hi :) I think that is welcome back really! Andre has done a huge amount here too so wb Andre! :) Regards from Tom :) --- On Tue, 10/1/12, Florian Effenberger flo...@documentfoundation.org wrote: From: Florian Effenberger flo...@documentfoundation.org Subject: Re: [board-discuss] New members To: board-discuss@documentfoundation.org Date: Tuesday, 10 January, 2012, 11:36 Hello, André Schnabel wrote on 2012-01-09 20:05: back from the end of the year vacations, the MC started to process membership applications. a very warm welcome also from my side - thanks for joining LibreOffice and TDF, looking forward to working with you! Florian -- Florian Effenberger flo...@documentfoundation.org Board of Directors at The Document Foundation Tel: +49 8341 99660880 | Mobile: +49 151 14424108 Skype: floeff | Twitter/Identi.ca: @floeff -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to board-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to board-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [board-discuss] CommunityBylaws and actual structure and governance of The Document Foundation as a legal entity
Hi :) The key words afaik are as a legal entity. TDF's assets are currently being looked after by 1 (or more) of the community organisations that are legally registered as legal entitys. TDF has not yet gained the status of being a legal entity. When it does the assets will be transferred. It was great to hear that the registration process is nearly complete already! I thought it would take at least a year! :) But perhaps i am reading too much into Andre's post. Regards from Tom :) --- On Wed, 30/11/11, Andre Schnabel andre.schna...@gmx.net wrote: From: Andre Schnabel andre.schna...@gmx.net Subject: Re: [board-discuss] CommunityBylaws and actual structure and governance of The Document Foundation as a legal entity To: board-discuss@documentfoundation.org Date: Wednesday, 30 November, 2011, 9:23 Hi Lionel, Original-Nachricht Von: Lionel Elie Mamane lio...@mamane.lu I'm reading the wiki page CommunityBylaws, and I'm confused. It says These Bylaws do not apply to the actual structure and governance of The Document Foundation as a legal entity (...). Yes, (unfortunately) the current situation has some cunfusing points. We all hope that this will be resolved within the next few (hopefully two) weeks. But then they go on doing exactly that. For example, they explain how the Board of Directors is elected, and by whom. The board of directors is AFAIK usually the people responsible to the law / state / courts that e.g. the money of the foundation is used in accordance to the goals of the foundation. The Bylaws were drafted from a communitie's point of view, when we did not exactly know, what legal model the foundation will follow. So while many things in the bylaws match legal terms ans structure, it is not _exactly_ what we will see in legal statutes. So to me, it is factual that the Bylaws *do* speak about the actual structure and governance of The Document Foundation as a legal entity: they speak about the composition of the BoD, and the BoD is part of the structure of the foundation as a legal entity, and by law the BoD must be involved in the governance of the foundation as a legal entity. Yes, at some points, the bylaws match the legal structure, BoD is one of the perfect (99%) matches. Other examples: * The Chairperson (CH) is in charge of representing the Foundation. This is something we need to change, if the foundation will be approved by German authorities. As you quoted, in German law the Board (of directors) represents the Foundation. regards, André -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to board-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to board-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [board-discuss] poll on regular BoD times
Hi :) +1 Regards from Tom :) --- On Sun, 6/11/11, Charles-H. Schulz charles.sch...@documentfoundation.org wrote: From: Charles-H. Schulz charles.sch...@documentfoundation.org Subject: Re: [board-discuss] poll on regular BoD times To: board-discuss@documentfoundation.org Date: Sunday, 6 November, 2011, 13:57 Florian, Le 06/11/2011 13:14, Florian Effenberger a écrit : Hello, it seems we didn't yet come up with a solution. Everyone voted (thanks for that!), and e.g. Wednesday 1600 UTC looks rather good, with 7 people joining and 2 possibly, giving a total of 9. On the weekend, however, it looks rather bad. Neither Saturday nor Sunday has many people who could join a call. Please everyone check your availability again. With the current results, we could e.g. do Wednesday 1600 UTC and Friday 1500 UTC, but no real weekend call. I am fine if we don't do one on the weekends, but wanted to give everyone a chance again in case two times in the evening is not desired. The poll is at http://doodle.com/rqay5h7syg45by9x Thanks, and have a nice Sunday, Florian May I propose an alternative solution? I was actually wondering if we would always need one call every week. We had a year of setup phase and obviously we still have much work to do, however, if we see things 6 months down the road maybe the BoD won't have to gather that often and sometimes it's best to have one call every two weeks with everyone available that short calls each week. I have no strong opinion here, only a comment that the problem at hand might not be a real problem. Best, Charles. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to board-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to board-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
RE: [board-discuss] Membership Committee
Hi :) I think OpenOffice before the forking was under some fairly strange leadership. ie a company that worked hard to increase community participation but not being very trusting of the communities they had grown = actively blocking many proposed patches and stuff developed by the community. Once Oracle took over things took a nose-dive and they demanded that people who held high positions in their community stepped down if they were also working in TDF. I've even heard that Oracle took ownership of funds built-up by the community and refused to cover community expenses. So, we are dealing with 2 communities, or 1 fractured community that has been fed mis-information about each other. As someone fairly new to the scene i think Apache are pretty much friends especially compared to profit-hungry organisations such as Oracle. Hopefully time may heal some of the wounds but maybe a bit of dirty laundry needs to be aired in order for us to discover which bits of mis-information people have been fed. Hopefully we can do that a little more sensitively and compassionately in the future. Just my 2 cents and quite probably contains inaccuracies as it's mostly stuff i have picked up from the press rather than at first hand. Regards from Tom :) --- On Sun, 6/11/11, Dennis E. Hamilton dennis.hamil...@acm.org wrote: From: Dennis E. Hamilton dennis.hamil...@acm.org Subject: RE: [board-discuss] Membership Committee To: board-discuss@documentfoundation.org Date: Sunday, 6 November, 2011, 18:03 I am not questioning the prerogatives of the TDF to govern itself in any manner. Norbert is correct that I have no standing in the matter. I was simply surprised that it came up here and Drew felt he had to address it. I don't question his doing so and how deliberate he is being about it. The AOOo project has committers and PPMC members who are also contributors to LO. I know because I see their work in both places. No one has ever questioned that at ASF. Not once. However, I think Norbert's reply, below, is ample demonstration of the polarization that individuals bring to these conversations. It is not just AOOo members who say outrageous things. Of course, our own outrageous things are always the truth, and therefore admirable, aren't they? Norbert, you can make my note mean whatever you want. I stand by it as written. Also, I said that there are conditions on participation in various ways. It is true here, and it is true at ASF. ASF has a license requirement, TDF has a license requirement, there are ways one becomes a committer on Apache projects, there are ways committer rights are granted for LO, etc. Apache has a license grant requirement, the iCLA, that, here, is handled by an e-mail message. ASF provides assurance of the code it releases in its way, the TDF has it in its way. I am not arguing the merits of any approach. Every open-source project has its conditions for operation and participation. Developers will contribute where it is comfortable and inviting for them. Not all developers are the same in the choices they make. How ASF members are elected and how the ASF board operates is all available on-line and I am not going to go into it. One more thing. I have found folks on ooo-dev who are cynical about the honesty and character of TDF members, too, but nothing so blatantly virulent as was just inserted here. I believe it is accurate to say that none of those statements are policy positions of the respective organizations. When they happen at AOOo I ignore them as trolling or, if there is a policy-unacceptable action being proposed, I challenge them as inconsistent and unacceptable. - Dennis E. Hamilton tools for document interoperability, http://nfoWorks.org/ dennis.hamil...@acm.org gsm: +1-206-779-9430 @orcmid -Original Message- From: Norbert Thiebaud [mailto:nthieb...@gmail.com] Sent: Sunday, November 06, 2011 02:18 To: board-discuss@documentfoundation.org Subject: Re: [board-discuss] Membership Committee On Sun, Nov 6, 2011 at 1:01 AM, Dennis E. Hamilton dennis.hamil...@acm.org wrote: [...] First about the ASF. This is not about ASF. ASF is just a mean to an IBM goal in that story. Now, some individuals This is not so much about individuals either... AOOo owe its existence to Corporate politics and interest. It was by no stretch of the imagination a grass root movement. [..] in the public interest. Can you spare us the marketing line. Every similar 'Foundation' operate under the same 'public interest' banner, which is a very broad one, and does not means, contrary to what one would expect, 'in the interest of the public'. (1) [..] There are no recriminations, there is no litmus test, You mean except signing an iCLA ? Drew will always be welcome to contribute in any manner he chooses.
Re: [steering-discuss] Preparing elections for the membership committee
Hi :) Yes, thanks :) I thought there was an impending problem rather than an existing problem. I doubt anyone here minds and even the most determined drone would have trouble trying to state a case even if there were an objection. So, it's all good Regards from Tom :) --- On Tue, 1/11/11, Norbert Thiebaud nthieb...@gmail.com wrote: From: Norbert Thiebaud nthieb...@gmail.com Subject: Re: [steering-discuss] Preparing elections for the membership committee To: steering-discuss@documentfoundation.org Date: Tuesday, 1 November, 2011, 15:16 On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 9:37 AM, Tom Davies tomdavie...@yahoo.co.uk wrote: Hi :) I have assumed that Thorsten has not stepped down from MC or something. Whatever he was stepping down from was in order for him to be able to do some work that he is being blocked from doing anyway right? So until the job needs to be started i think Thorsten is still on whatever it was he was going to step down from. Sorry, i just got a bit muddled. The MC is in charge of supervising the BoD election so clearly someone running for a BoD possition cannot be member of the MC The MC is in charge of supervising Solemn Address and Impeachment of the Board of Directors. again that create a conflict of interest if one is allowed to be BoD member and MC member. So, MC membership and BoD membership and candidacy are mutually exclusive. This has been overlooked during this election cycle. Thorsthen should have resigned of his MC position as soon as he declared his intention to run for a BoD position. I don;t think that there is any suspicion that this 'irregularity' had any impact on the election, and clearly Thorsten election and behavior are beyond reproach. Still, The forms do matter, and even the impression of impropriety can create un-welcomed drama/suspiction/FUD etc... Hence the necessity to rectify the situation, hence Thorsten stepping down from his MC responsibilities. Does that clarifies it ? Norbert -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
side-note Re: [steering-discuss] chairmen
Hi :) Florian. It is good to have these issues dealt with. There is no need to apologise for 'spam' as it is all relevant and important stuff. If these issue weren't raised today they would have to be raised another day and they are the type of thing that is good to deal with and get out of the way quickly. I think the Steering Committee and the MC have been fantastic and done a remarkable job. Avoiding a complete re-shuffle all at the same time makes sense so that there is some continuity. The current BoD seems a good selection and that promises well for the future of TDF and LO. It would be good to add some diversity added to the management structure of TDF without losing anyone. Regards from Tom :) --- On Sun, 30/10/11, Florian Effenberger flo...@documentfoundation.org wrote: From: Florian Effenberger flo...@documentfoundation.org Subject: [steering-discuss] chairmen To: steering-discuss@documentfoundation.org Date: Sunday, 30 October, 2011, 18:44 Hello, sorry for spamming you so massively today, but I want to use the free day to get some formal things done for TDF. The current statutes (which you will soon have in a translated English version) foresee, as it is a legal requirement in Germany, that there will be two chairmen: One chairman and one deputy. I know we had a discussion on this topic quite some months ago, and before you are surprised that it comes up again, be advised that contrary to the original plannings, the role does not have additional rights. The draft mainly foresees that for legally representing the foundation towards third parties, the chairman and some other BoD member has to sign the contract, and in case the chairman cannot, the deputy does. So, for any contract, it cannot be signed without the chairman, like it is common practice in many associations as well (FrODeV has a similar rule), except in cases there are individual warrants, which is possible with our statutes. Naturally, the chairmen will also be the first point of contact for authorities and other boring legal stuff. ;-) (Read: In case the tax authorities need information, they will first ping you. In case the foundation authorities have issues or questions, you will be the first who gets pinged. Etc.) Basically, that's it, there are no further rights or duties, no more merits and no stronger voice, but you will see that when we will have the translation ready. The statues do not set explicit rules on whom to appoint, they just foresee that the BoD appoints two of its members to these roles. NB: Deputies can, to my understanding, *not* be appointed chairmen. Some proposed (and IMHO, we had this at least in one early bylaws draft) that those who had been elected with the most votes should be appointed automatically. However, not automatically those who have most votes want to run for that role, so I propose that everyone of the newly elected BoD thinks whether he wants to get appointed, and we discuss it. Only if several people run and cannot agree on two candidates, we might switch back to the most votes model. Best is to wait until the translation is ready so we have the same understanding of the topic, since the term chairman might raise some confusion, but I wanted to make you aware of it already. Florian -- Florian Effenberger flo...@documentfoundation.org Board of Directors at The Document Foundation Tel: +49 8341 99660880 | Mobile: +49 151 14424108 Skype: floeff | Twitter/Identi.ca: @floeff -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [steering-discuss] renaming this list
Hi :) +1 to board. It's more generic and so people will recognise it more easily from other organisations. All 3 options have delightful puns of course. Regards from Tom :) --- On Wed, 26/10/11, Jonathan Aquilina eagles051...@gmail.com wrote: From: Jonathan Aquilina eagles051...@gmail.com Subject: Re: [steering-discuss] renaming this list To: steering-discuss@documentfoundation.org Date: Wednesday, 26 October, 2011, 14:52 On 26/10/2011 15:32, Florian Effenberger wrote: Hello, since the Steering Committee will soon cease its existence, and the newly elected BoD will be officially in charge, I would like to rename this list. My proposal would either be: 1. core-discuss@tdf 2. board-discuss@tdf I am in favor of #2. Thoughts? Florian I know my input wont really matter but 2 seems the most practical in the sense its easy to identify what is meant by board. Core is ambiguous core what developers etc. Regards Jonathan Aquilina Get a signature like this. http://r1.wisestamp.com/r/landing?promo=19dest=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.wisestamp.com%2Femail-install%3Futm_source%3Dextension%26utm_medium%3Demail%26utm_campaign%3Dpromo_19 CLICK HERE. http://r1.wisestamp.com/r/landing?promo=19dest=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.wisestamp.com%2Femail-install%3Futm_source%3Dextension%26utm_medium%3Demail%26utm_campaign%3Dpromo_19 -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [steering-discuss] renaming this list
Hi :) How about just keeping the current name, steering-discuss, or perhaps the 3 boards could be; - directors-discuss - advisory-discuss - trustees-discuss with this one being the directors-discuss? BoD is fairly unique to TDF so it's not very transparent to people outside of the organisation or people that are new to it. Regards from Tom :) --- On Wed, 26/10/11, Heinz W. Simoneit hein...@gmx.de wrote: From: Heinz W. Simoneit hein...@gmx.de Subject: Re: [steering-discuss] renaming this list To: steering-discuss@documentfoundation.org Date: Wednesday, 26 October, 2011, 16:34 Hi Flo, *, Andre Schnabel schrieb: Hi, Von: Friedrich Strohmaierdamokles4-lis...@bits-fritz.de Betreff: Re: [steering-discuss] renaming this list My proposal would either be: 1. core-discuss@tdf 2. board-discuss@tdf 3. bod-discuss bod has kind of brand at least in my perception and is less generic than board. +1 I'm still working on the translation of the statutes (sorry for the delay). While board is a correct term, we will also have an advisory board and board of trustees. So board of directors or bod should be used to identify clearly, what we are speaking about. +1 (bod) Best, Heinz -- Have a nice time! -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [steering-discuss] renaming this list
Hi :) Ahah, if the 1 list covers all three boards then board-discuss makes a lot of sense. I had assumed that some of those lists might not be for the general public but might have been useful for the relevant people. Regards from Tom :) --- On Wed, 26/10/11, Florian Effenberger flo...@documentfoundation.org wrote: From: Florian Effenberger flo...@documentfoundation.org Subject: Re: [steering-discuss] renaming this list To: steering-discuss@documentfoundation.org Date: Wednesday, 26 October, 2011, 19:10 Hi, Tom Davies wrote on 2011-10-26 17:50: How about just keeping the current name, steering-discuss, or perhaps the 3 boards could be; - directors-discuss - advisory-discuss - trustees-discuss with this one being the directors-discuss? BoD is fairly unique to TDF so it's not very transparent to people outside of the organisation or people that are new to it. I think there should be only one public discussion list for those, otherwise we end up with too many lists. Given that bod is a bad choice (thanks, Regina!), I propose either directors-discuss or board-discuss with a slight preference for the latter. Florian -- Florian Effenberger flo...@documentfoundation.org Steering Committee and Founding Member of The Document Foundation Tel: +49 8341 99660880 | Mobile: +49 151 14424108 Skype: floeff | Twitter/Identi.ca: @floeff -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [steering-discuss] Candidacy for Board: Michael Meeks
Hi :) Thanks :) I'm not going to be at Paris but thanks for the offer. Documentation on how to join in with other teams (including the Docs Team (following recent upgrades to their infrastructure)) also needs to be done. I don't know what UNO is. It seems to be something that depends on javascript or .Net or something?? Seems a bit strange. Of the links i found this link made the most sense http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/DevGuide/FirstSteps/Programming_with_UNO and even that was a tad confusing imo. Does the limited guidance on how to add a language or new translation push people into using UNO? Oddly we don't get many calls for how to translate or how to add a new language and when we do people seem satisfied with the links we give them to specific teams or to the global translations list. We do need to get decent guides for those things but we get a lot more people asking about how to join in with programming and people seldom seem happy with what we can give them. It would be good to have a proper LO Guide that reflects LO's direction instead of the direction under Sun. If there are other guides that could be usefully added to the collection that would be great. Anyone can either edit the page or pass the links to the documentation list. Anyway, thanks hugely for your considerate reply. Regards from Tom :) --- On Mon, 10/10/11, Michael Meeks michael.me...@suse.com wrote: From: Michael Meeks michael.me...@suse.com Subject: Re: [steering-discuss] Candidacy for Board: Michael Meeks To: steering-discuss@documentfoundation.org Date: Monday, 10 October, 2011, 10:11 Hi Tom, On Sat, 2011-10-08 at 18:02 +0100, Tom Davies wrote: One of the top priorities for the Documentation Team right now is a guide to help people that want to start programming for LibreOffice. Cool ! :-) and of course, it's something that can be dead useful. There is already a good one for Extensions Right - and of course, we'd prefer people to write code that can be integrated into the core cleanly, and have code sharing between different implementations (it's easier to hack that up, debug it, and deploy it too FWIW). At the moment the Docs Team can only point to http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Documentation#Other_Documentation_and_Resources I like the collection; it'd be great to excerpt / re-write some more functionally focused flows for the things we know happen lots: How to add a new language How to add a new translation But of course many things are simply not documented at all; and worse most of the existing docs are *heavily* UNO focused, which is (IMHO) a big mistake. Anyhow - there were some starter tasks I mentioned to David, when they're done - lets have a call brainstorm on what more can be done, and how best to do it; will you be in Paris to discuss ? I suspect there is enough out there to dig out and re-hash in a helpful way. As an example if we systematically discard anything that talks about UNO - and condense what little is left (code structure diagrams / functional descriptions etc.) I think we might end up with something quite useful for new core hackers: or at least a nucleus to work from. Thanks, Michael. -- michael.me...@suse.com , Pseudo Engineer, itinerant idiot -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [steering-discuss] Candidacy for Board: Michael Meeks
Hi :) One of the top priorities for the Documentation Team right now is a guide to help people that want to start programming for LibreOffice. There is already a good one for Extensions but most of the scattered things we have for programmers are apparently for OpenOffice when it was under Sun. LibreOffice has significantly improved things, for example the Easy Hacks and probably details about the infrastructure and work-flow. At the moment the Docs Team can only point to http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Documentation#Other_Documentation_and_Resources Regards from Tom :) --- On Sat, 8/10/11, Jesús Corrius je...@softcatala.org wrote: From: Jesús Corrius Subject: Re: [steering-discuss] Candidacy for Board: To: steering-discuss@documentfoundation.org Date: Saturday, 8 October, 2011, 15:33 This could usefully be a collaborative initiative actively worked on by Caolan McNamara, Thorsten Behrens and Michael Meeks. In my opinion, I don't think it's best for the project to put some of the most skilled developers to work in documentation, when other developers can also do this task perfectly well. Jesús Corrius -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [steering-discuss] Base - a new mailing list?
Hi :) Base does support a lot of different back-ends but it needs to have a default one. The current default seems to be quite troublesome so people are often told to use something else such PostGreSql or MariaDb / MySql. MariaDb is the same as MySql except that it is developing fast and has almost all the MySql community including the original developers. The community were even more unhappy with being under Oracle than they were under Sun so they forked off and formed a new organisation so that they could push through a large number of bug-fixes and developments that Sun / Oracle had been blocking for years. I did mention this earlier in this thread but i know it's difficult to keep track of issues like that when this list is not focused on Base so i guess i have to mention it again. MySql is in roughly the same state as OOo before Apache got involved. MariaDb is a drop-in replacement with a much stronger future. Clearly people on this list don't know much about usign Base. When you open Base the first thing it asks is which back-end you would like to use and there is a drop-down that includes the various back-ends mentioned and more but has a default of HqSql. Again i guess it's something that people on this list might not be aware of so it's a opint that will probably have to be mentioned several times in the course of any discussion about Base in this or any of the other existing lists. If the PostGreSql people could be encouraged to send some devs to work on Base then that would be a huge help and would greatly help tighter integration with that particular back-end. It would be nice to include other people that are interested in working on various aspects of Base, eg doumentation, devs, maybe design etc but not all those people are on this list. Perhaps one way would be to cross-post any discussion about Base so that all the lists got any post about Base? That would neatly avoid having to set-up a new list and still reach the various different people :) Regards from Tom :) --- On Tue, 13/9/11, Ian Lynch ianrly...@gmail.com wrote: From: Ian Lynch ianrly...@gmail.com Subject: Re: [steering-discuss] Base - a new mailing list? To: steering-discuss@documentfoundation.org Date: Tuesday, 13 September, 2011, 9:17 On 13 September 2011 07:47, Jonathan Aquilina eagles051...@gmail.comwrote: On 13/09/2011 08:43, Ian Lynch wrote: I think part of the problem is the rise of client server databases with the internet. It's a bit of an irony because to start with OOo used the principle of connecting to a database rather than including the old Addabas that was with StarOffice. Snag now is that even if the use of Base is minority it's difficult to withdraw it without upsetting them. Ian Sent from my Android Smartphone. www.theingots.org On 13 Sep 2011 00:16, Tom Daviestomdavie...@yahoo.co.**uktomdavie...@yahoo.co.uk wrote: Hi :) Done that. Been there. It didn't work. Base is dying. Can we just admit that and remove it from LO? Regards from Tom :) Why not find a way to integrate connectivity to all the major databases such as mysql and MsSQL servers? This was the method in the early days. I assume it still works. At the weekend at the Apache Bar Camp I was talking to PostgreSQL developers who are very interested in better integration with OOo/Libo. We are likely to be working together on training and certification so there are possibilities to get some funding to this development but its going to take a little time. They are applying for FP7 funding through the EU and we can complement that with Lifelong Learning projects. --- On Mon, 12/9/11, Thorsten Behrensthb@**documentfoundation.orgt...@documentfoundation.org wrote: From: Thorsten Behrensthb@**documentfoundation.orgt...@documentfoundation.org Subject: Re: [steering-discuss] Base - a new mailing list? To: Tom Daviestomdavie...@yahoo.co.**uk tomdavie...@yahoo.co.uk Cc: steering-discuss@**documentfoundation.orgsteering-discuss@documentfoundation.org Date: Monday, 12 September, 2011, 15:34 Tom Davies wrote: Do you mean how many expressed an interest and tried to give it a go during t... -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+help@** documentfoundation.org steering-discuss%2bh...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/**get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-** unsubscribe/http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.**documentfoundation.org/** Netiquette http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.**documentfoundation.org/www/** steering-discuss/http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- Ian Ofqual Accredited IT Qualifications (The Schools ITQ) www.theINGOTs.org +44 (0)1827 305940 The Learning Machine Limited, Reg
Re: [steering-discuss] Base - a new mailing list?
Hi :) As i keep pointing out TDF started up almost exactly 1 year ago. All the other apps have a number of people that work on them or happily move between the different apps but none touch base. Quirks and regressions are quite common in Base between one release of LO and another. The regressions sometimes get posted as bug-reports but almost no devs are working on Base so they don't get fixed. The current 'plan' of sitwait has NOT worked during the last 1 year and shows no sign of working soon. It would be nice to have a list dedicated to Base where we could discuss issues about how to re-invigorate that part of the project. Regards from Tom :) --- On Tue, 13/9/11, Thorsten Behrens t...@documentfoundation.org wrote: From: Thorsten Behrens t...@documentfoundation.org Subject: Re: [steering-discuss] Base - a new mailing list? To: Tom Davies tomdavie...@yahoo.co.uk Cc: steering-discuss@documentfoundation.org Date: Tuesday, 13 September, 2011, 9:25 Tom Davies wrote: Done that. Been there. It didn't work. Base is dying. Can we just admit that and remove it from LO? Hi Tom, why do you think it's dying? And removing it from LO is not an option for me. People using it need to step up, and start getting involved - and I'm sure they will. Free software is a lot about scratching your itches - if something does not work properly, get your hands dirty try fixing it. We'll all happily answer code questions over at libreoff...@lists.freedesktop.org Cheers, -- Thorsten -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [steering-discuss] Base - a new mailing list?
Hi :) Hmmm, if you depend on Base then i think it's about time you start looking into switching to Kexi. It supports a variety of back-ends, just as Base does, but it does have a large number of devs actively working on it. I think we have to start recommending Kexi to anyone that has any problem with Base as Base's problems are unlikely to get fixed given the determination here of blocking any plans to develop a Base community within TDF. Regards from Tom :) --- On Tue, 13/9/11, Thorsten Behrens t...@documentfoundation.org wrote: From: Thorsten Behrens t...@documentfoundation.org Subject: Re: [steering-discuss] Base - a new mailing list? To: Tom Davies tomdavie...@yahoo.co.uk Cc: steering-discuss@documentfoundation.org Date: Tuesday, 13 September, 2011, 9:25 Tom Davies wrote: Done that. Been there. It didn't work. Base is dying. Can we just admit that and remove it from LO? Hi Tom, why do you think it's dying? And removing it from LO is not an option for me. People using it need to step up, and start getting involved - and I'm sure they will. Free software is a lot about scratching your itches - if something does not work properly, get your hands dirty try fixing it. We'll all happily answer code questions over at libreoff...@lists.freedesktop.org Cheers, -- Thorsten -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [steering-discuss] Base - a new mailing list?
Hi :) Done that. Been there. It didn't work. Base is dying. Can we just admit that and remove it from LO? Regards from Tom :) --- On Mon, 12/9/11, Thorsten Behrens t...@documentfoundation.org wrote: From: Thorsten Behrens t...@documentfoundation.org Subject: Re: [steering-discuss] Base - a new mailing list? To: Tom Davies tomdavie...@yahoo.co.uk Cc: steering-discuss@documentfoundation.org Date: Monday, 12 September, 2011, 15:34 Tom Davies wrote: Do you mean how many expressed an interest and tried to give it a go during the past year or do you mean how many at any one time or do you mean how many right now? All of that would be useful to know. A list does not magically make a community appear. I'd suggest either discuss@ or libreoff...@lists.freedesktop.org to attempt to coagulate interested parties - libreoffice@fdo has the advantage that Cc-ing unsubscribed parties permits them to answer to the list w/o moderation. Feel free to Cc (or Bcc) the folks you'd think might be interested, by proposing some specific things to do (like the developer docs you mentioned). Once there's people working on stuff, and still want a separate list, feel encouraged to come back with a proposal here. Cheers, -- Thorsten -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[steering-discuss] Base - a new mailing list?
Hi :) A few people have asked about starting up a new mailing list to try to bring together people that want to work on Base. People from Documentation, Developers perhaps later on some people from Design. At the moment there are people that want to work on Base but each is isolated and 'waiting' for people on other teams to do things that need to be done before they can start. Could we start up a new mailing list to allow cross-group collaboration on Base? Who should i ask to set it up? Should i ask the web team? Regards from Tom :) -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [steering-discuss] LinuxCon Europe
Hi :) +1 For meetings, conferences, training days and stuff like that we would often have an amount for refreshments. In End of Year Accounts or Financial Statements for SMBs (Small-Medium sized Business) there is often be an item labelled Refreshments buried in Other Expenses. Is food not allowed in organisations registered in Germany? It would be a shame because you have great stuff over there. Regards from Tom :) From: Simon Phipps si...@webmink.com To: steering-discuss@documentfoundation.org Sent: Fri, 26 August, 2011 10:45:30 Subject: Re: [steering-discuss] LinuxCon Europe On 26 Aug 2011, at 10:32, Florian Effenberger wrote: Hi Italo, thanks for your engagement! Italo Vignoli wrote on 2011-08-26 11:04: Including food, I will spend a maximum of 300 Euro. I am asking the Steering Committee to approve this reimbursement. Given that we can pay this from SPI (paying from FrODeV is a bit problematic when it comes to travel costs and foreign countries, due to tax regulations) - +1 from my side. The only point we should talk about is food - as a general rule, normally reimbursements should only contain hotel and transportation, but no food. TDF has no rules yet on this, but maybe we should limit it to that? That's an odd rule. A reimbursement for a guest or for an emissary should include Travel, Accommodation and Living. The only place in recent memory that has told me it does not pay for Living is TDF. S. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [steering-discuss] contracting a lawyer for the foundation's set-up process
Hi :) I think that counts as 6 votes with none against, so it's nem con or something. The votes from deputies doesn't count if the people they are deputies for have voted. Not that it makes much difference since it's still a strong majority with none against. Regards from Tom :) From: Florian Effenberger flo...@documentfoundation.org To: steering-discuss@documentfoundation.org Sent: Wed, 17 August, 2011 11:41:29 Subject: Re: [steering-discuss] contracting a lawyer for the foundation's set-up process Hello, I just counted the votes, and I found at least these voting +1: Florian Charles Italo Thorsten André Sophie Plus Michael and Christoph and deputies, plus some non-binding votes, so I hereby close the vote and just added it as an official decision to http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/TDF/BoD_Decisions @André: I ws not sure on how to reflect the current voting - Michael and Christoph voted +1, but the seat holders they are deputies for voted themselves. I wrote approved with votes of 8 voting members (including two deputy votes) - should that be just 6 voting members instead, to make clear only 6 people had valid votes? Thanks for your support! Florian -- Florian Effenberger flo...@documentfoundation.org Steering Committee and Founding Member of The Document Foundation Tel: +49 8341 99660880 | Mobile: +49 151 14424108 Skype: floeff | Twitter/Identi.ca: @floeff -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [steering-discuss] decision on screenshots
Hi :) It's all good. We get there in the end. Hopefully in a more elegant and less turgid way next time! Regards from Tom :) From: Simon Phipps si...@webmink.com To: steering-discuss@documentfoundation.org Sent: Fri, 12 August, 2011 17:30:55 Subject: Re: [steering-discuss] decision on screenshots snip / I'm amused that the point I was making has been taken on board silently; naturally I agree :-) S. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [steering-discuss] decision on screenshots
Hi :) +1 Possibly omit the middle paragraph. It would leave the statement without an explanation but at least it would state what the preference is. Regards from Tom :) From: Florian Effenberger flo...@documentfoundation.org To: steering-discuss@documentfoundation.org Sent: Fri, 12 August, 2011 10:00:01 Subject: Re: [steering-discuss] decision on screenshots Hi, based on the feedback, this would be my proposal to vote on: == Screenshots for documentation, website and marketing should preferably be taken on GNU/Linux, but may also be taken on any other operating system. The Steering Committee acknowledges that there is a small legal risk involved for screenshots on non-free operating systems, but it feels that the legal risk involved is no greater than other theoretical risk free software projects face. The Steering Committee recommends a consistent visual appearance (e.g. theming and branding) for the screenshots taken on the selected operating system. It is up to the LibreOffice community how to achieve that consistency. == Are there any severe objections and concerns (please no beauty corrections, only severe changes), or can we start the SC vote? Florian -- Florian Effenberger flo...@documentfoundation.org Steering Committee and Founding Member of The Document Foundation Tel: +49 8341 99660880 | Mobile: +49 151 14424108 Skype: floeff | Twitter/Identi.ca: @floeff -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [steering-discuss] List discussion purpose
Hi :) +1 Also, allowing threads (such as the one about job-description for marketing contacts) to split out to other, more relevant, lists is great and seems to be working fine. It's inevitable that discussions take place all over the place because there is a lot of energy and excitement in TDF and about LibreOffice. Inevitably that is going to ruffle some feathers but it's not necessarily a bad thing. This sort of discussion to un-ruffle accidental issues usually goes well here too. It's fairly clear there is no deliberate hiding going on and clearly no-one here has bad intentions. Regards from Tom :) From: Paulo de Souza Lima paulo.s.l...@varekai.org To: steering-discuss@documentfoundation.org Sent: Fri, 12 August, 2011 15:27:28 Subject: Re: [steering-discuss] List discussion purpose 2011/8/12 David Nelson li...@traduction.biz Hi Florian, On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 4:46 PM, Florian Effenberger flo...@documentfoundation.org wrote: I think it has been discussed in public rather often that there is a private list where all the steering committee members are on, and that there are private phone calls sometimes. We never planned to have things in secret, so sorry if that impression has grown. Perhaps it would be good to list the private mailing lists existing, so that interested people can send a request to a relevant human being for a subscription. Otherwise, some people might never learn that they even exist. After discussion threads on private MLs and after private calls held by the SC and/or relevant project teams (such as the sysadmins), perhaps it might be a solution to publish an advisory on the tdf-discuss list explaining as much as possible about the subject of the call/thread, and as much as possible about the results of the discussions? That way, at least people would be informed that they have taken place, rather than the community possible being totally unaware of such communication. I don't see any problems in private mailing lists if they are listed somewhere and the rules to be included in them are public, fair and clear. -- David Nelson Cheers -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- Paulo de Souza Lima Técnico em Eletrônica e Administrador http://www.pasl.net.br http://almalivre.wordpress.com Curitiba - PR Linux User #432358 Ubuntu User #28729 Para que as pessoas conquistem a paz em suas relações, a paz espiritual e a paz entre os povos, é preciso que antes se ganhe a batalha interna das virtudes sobre os defeitos - Talal Husseini - Filósofo Acropolitano For people to achieve peace in their relationships, spiritual peace and the peace among people, it's necessary, earlier, to win the internal battle between virtues and defects - Talal Husseini - Acropolitan Philosopher -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [steering-discuss] contracting a lawyer for the foundation's set-up process
Hi :) +1 definitely. Regards from Tom :) From: Charles-H. Schulz charles.sch...@documentfoundation.org To: steering-discuss@documentfoundation.org Sent: Fri, 12 August, 2011 16:55:51 Subject: Re: [steering-discuss] contracting a lawyer for the foundation's set-up process A lawyer is indispensable I think, and the fees sound reasonnable . +1 Charles. Le 12 août 2011 17:34, Florian Effenberger flo...@documentfoundation.org a écrit : Hello, as many of you know, we're right before filing the application for legally setting up the Foundation. For the process of filing, it is highly advisable to have a lawyer assisting us and acting as official point of contact. Not only will some legal topics come up, but also being represented by a lawyer greatly helps in being perceived as serious entity by the authorities. Among the lawyer's tasks there will be the communication with the authorities, acting on legal questions, and preparing the filing documents in a way they fit the legal requirements. Unfortunately, German law makes it very complicated for lawyers to act pro bono on these kinds of things (which is different to e.g. the US), so we plan to officially contract a lawyer to assist us. In order to have legal advice for the process, which might take a few weeks, I'd like to ask the steering committee to approve a sum of 3.000,- € in total. This is the sum one of our preferred lawyers has mentioned to us, and given that several hours of work for professional services have to be invested, I consider that amount very well spent. Depending on the lawyer and the services used, hourly rates of about 50-150 € are fairly normal in Germany, and I expect the process to take a few hours of time to be completed, especially given the speciality with the membership we have come up with. Thoughts welcome. Florian -- Florian Effenberger flo...@documentfoundation.org Steering Committee and Founding Member of The Document Foundation Tel: +49 8341 99660880 | Mobile: +49 151 14424108 Skype: floeff | Twitter/Identi.ca: @floeff -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
off-list Re: [steering-discuss] addition to trademark policy
Hi :) Thanks for jumping in there :) I hoped there were other people from Branding around or at least other people that might have some vague idea about the issues. It's ok for the rest of us to guess but it's better to have the right answers from the right people because there is a strong chance of the rest of us getting it wrong and falling into 'obvious' traps. Italo was the only name i knew for certain. Thanks and regards from Tom :) From: Christoph Noack christ...@dogmatux.com To: steering-discuss@documentfoundation.org Sent: Thu, 11 August, 2011 7:08:01 Subject: Re: [steering-discuss] addition to trademark policy Hi Tom, all! A quick note ... mis-using the steering-discuss being an SC deputy. Am Mittwoch, den 10.08.2011, 10:35 +0100 schrieb Tom Davies: Sounds good to me but i'm curious about the Branding Team's thoughts on this. Italo? I'm not Italo, but I'm one of those who (with Bernhard, Nik, Ivan, ...) developed the today's branding. Personally, I would be happy if we could ship the non-tagline logo - and add the tagline on demand. This will make things more simple and even more visually attractive. When we worked on the motif design, Nik already made a draft how this could look like: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/cgi_img_auth.php/b/b3/ScatterInContext_bunch.jpg So +1 to the proposal. One thing that - then - needs to be addressed is the todays tagline logo. Later this year, I'd like to propose a small revision to make non-tagline and tagline logo more consistent. Cheers, Christoph From: Florian Effenberger flo...@documentfoundation.org To: steering-discuss@documentfoundation.org Sent: Wed, 10 August, 2011 9:25:05 Subject: Re: [steering-discuss] addition to trademark policy Hi, Andre Schnabel wrote on 2011-08-08 13:17: ... our default logos in the source tree use the TDF tagline (at least this was when I last did a build from source), but the tagged logo should be used for instance on .. software builds compiled by the Document Foundation. Imho quite easy to resolve: use the community logos per default for builds from source. Enable the Logo with TDF tagline on build time and tell people to use this only when doing builds that are supposed to be distributed via TDF resources. that indeed sounds like a senseful idea. What do others think? -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [steering-discuss] addition to trademark policy
Hi :) Good point. There are a LOT of distros out there so perhaps it might be best to save up applications until there is a batch to work through to help with work-flow. Anyway, there is no point worrying about this unless the TDF suddenly gets swamped with tons of requests and that would give the batch anyway! lol Ok, lets forget this suggestion and get back to what this thread was really about before i side-tracked it (apols) :) Regards from Tom :) From: drew d...@baseanswers.com To: steering-discuss@documentfoundation.org Sent: Wed, 10 August, 2011 16:15:44 Subject: Re: [steering-discuss] addition to trademark policy On Wed, 2011-08-10 at 17:06 +0200, Florian Effenberger wrote: Hi, Tom Davies wrote on 2011-08-10 16:45: if it could be that simple then it would be easy to give quick answers to requests. I'm not sure what the relevance of Debian is. Could there be an agreement now to allow any distro in the top 100 (or just top 50?) at DistroWatch http://distrowatch.com to use 'the proper' logos and splash-screen rather than the community versions. Any other distros that contact TDF could be dealt with one at a time but it might help to have a blanket agreement covering the most popular ones. I would not give general permissions. Permissions that are different from the standard policy should always be granted on an individual basis / case-by-case basis. +1 It would make sense I suppose, looking at Linux distro's for instance, to construct a reasonably simple mechanism for non-commercial users to request the logo - perhaps a web form, the request could be sent to a mailing list, a standing practice _could_ be to allow use after some period of days after request assuming no one objects. (just a off the top of the head thought) //drew -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [steering-discuss] decision on screenshots
Hi :) I think that unnecessarily exposing TDF (or people doing work for it) to a risk in a way that could NOT be fix easily quickly would be really dumb. It is an easily avoidable risk. The fact that one person is ignorant of the risk (or chooses to ignore it) does not mean the rest of the Steering Committee are. Indeed, there was a meeting that came up with the rough draft of the 2 paragraphs prepared by Florian. There is still no mention of where the responsibility would lay if the perceived risk did happen but as the meeting wrote it, the potential threat should be avoided by using GnuLinux if easily possible. With GnuLinux screen-shots there is NO risk. It also means the Documentation Team can keep doing what they are already doing = aiming towards professionally consistent documentation. The licensing of GnuLinux tends to be copy-left allowing people to copy and adapt anything they like. By contrast the Windows Eula is very restrictive and people in the discussion even highlighted paragraphs that showed that any editing of screen-shots in a way that would make them useful for documentation would be a violation. There was a suggestion earlier in the discussion that if TDF did get clobbered by MS for using screen-shots on their OSes then it could 1. Let MS target individuals that produced the screen-shots or 2. TDF could counter-sue the individuals themselves The post also suggested that TDF should reject any documentation that was produced using non-Windows screen-shots. In the MS vs TomTom case. TomTom were forced to pay substantial damages to MS for saving data. The TomTom devices used what 'everyone' uses for saving data. The hardware was their own, the systems were their own but they used Fat32, or Fat16 file-systems for saving their own data onto their own devices. Fat32, Fat16 or just plain Fat are 'used by everyone' for usb-sticks, memory-cards, sd-cards for cameras, phones, mobile devices, calculators and so on. Apparently we should all pay MS for the privilege of storing our own data on our own systems just in case MS suddenly decides to single us out while ignoring other people's violations. Personally on small external devices i tend to stick with ext2 or i don't even worry about the re-writes issue on older SSd tech, and use ext4. The Fat systems is notoriously flaky and even Ntfs has horrible problems that are neatly avoided in the ancient ext2 so i actually gain a lot by doing so. Occasionally i can't share data on it with insecure systems. Yes, everyone is exposed to a large number of unknown risks of a variety of types but this is a known risk that is easy to avoid. Why ask people to beat their head against a wall when they could just walk around the corner? Regards from Tom :) From: Simon Phipps si...@webmink.com To: steering-discuss@documentfoundation.org Sent: Mon, 8 August, 2011 1:07:20 Subject: Re: [steering-discuss] decision on screenshots My proposal stands :-) :-) On 8 Aug 2011, at 01:04, Tom Davies wrote: Hi :) That would completely change the statement. It is the opposite of what Florian wrote. Are we going to reopen discussion about the issue again? Regards from Tom :) From: Simon Phipps si...@webmink.com To: steering-discuss@documentfoundation.org Sent: Sun, 7 August, 2011 13:44:24 Subject: Re: [steering-discuss] decision on screenshots The Steering Committee acknowledges that there is a small legal risk involved for screenshots on non-free operating systems, but the risk is deemed low. This is too strong. The fact is, every action any project takes is subject to legal risk. Name one that isn't. All that's happened here is that (for whatever motive) the theoretical risk has been articulated for (a part of) this case. I'd suggest saying: The Steering Committee feels that the legal risk involved in using screenshots of non-free desktops in documentation is no greater than any other theoretical risk facing software projects. S. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [steering-discuss] decision on screenshots
Hi :) It's easy to make empty promises but there is nothing written down to say that the Steering Committee and BoD would accept any responsibility at all. The risk is all on individual contributors at the moment. Regards from Tom :) From: André Schnabel andre.schna...@gmx.net To: steering-discuss@documentfoundation.org Sent: Mon, 8 August, 2011 18:31:49 Subject: Re: [steering-discuss] decision on screenshots snip / Oh - imho TDF should be there to protect individuals (who actually contribute to TDF projects), not to sue them. snip / regards, André -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [steering-discuss] decision on screenshots
Hi :) There were a reasonable amount of +1s to the first draft produced by Florian and no-one voted against it then or after the meeting. We had just heard the advice of a couple of legal people one of whom specialises in this type of area. Regards from Tom :) From: Norbert Thiebaud nthieb...@gmail.com To: steering-discuss@documentfoundation.org Sent: Mon, 8 August, 2011 18:41:05 Subject: Re: [steering-discuss] decision on screenshots On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 8:43 AM, Tom Davies tomdavie...@yahoo.co.uk wrote: Hi :) I think that unnecessarily exposing TDF (or people doing work for it) to a risk in a way that could NOT be fix easily quickly would be really dumb. It is an easily avoidable risk. I think it is unnecessary to worry about fabricated convoluted legal scenario without precedent. The fact that one person is ignorant of the risk (or chooses to ignore it) does not mean the rest of the Steering Committee are. Did you pool the steering committee member individually ? what basis do you have to claim that just _one person_ think that this legal angle to force a POV is a strawman ? Indeed, there was a meeting that came up with the rough draft of the 2 paragraphs prepared by Florian. There is still no mention of where the responsibility would lay if the perceived risk did happen but as the meeting wrote it, the potential threat should be avoided by using GnuLinux if easily possible. using Linux and/or Gnu does not avoid the alleged risk. Neither own the copyright on icons that would be displayed in a screen-shoot. With GnuLinux screen-shots there is NO risk. It also means the Documentation Team can keep doing what they are already doing = aiming towards professionally consistent documentation. Yes the 'consistent' argument is indeed valid... but the so-called legal risk is a straw man The licensing of GnuLinux tends to be copy-left allowing people to copy and adapt anything they like. By contrast the Windows Eula is very restrictive The Eula could demand that you give away your first born child, that would still not make that the Law. actually the French version of the EULA for Windows 7 Basic, Section 27, spell out clearly that Eula does not trump the Law of the Land. and people in the discussion even highlighted paragraphs that showed that any editing of screen-shots in a way that would make them useful for documentation would be a violation. There was a suggestion earlier in the discussion that if TDF did get clobbered by MS for using screen-shots on their OSes then it could 1. Let MS target individuals that produced the screen-shots or 2. TDF could counter-sue the individuals themselves Apparently we don't even need Microsoft to conduct FUD campaign, we do just fine on our own :-( The post also suggested that TDF should reject any documentation that was produced using non-Windows screen-shots. In the MS vs TomTom case. TomTom were forced to pay substantial damages to MS for saving data. What patent do screen-shoots infringe ? And how did you get access to confidential settlement terms ? http://news.cnet.com/8301-13860_3-10206988-56.html : Specific financial terms were not disclosed. [snip irrelevant US-patent non-sens ] Yes, everyone is exposed to a large number of unknown risks of a variety of types but this is a known risk that is easy to avoid. Why ask people to beat their head against a wall when they could just walk around the corner? Or just easily not enocurage those that manufacture brick wall in their path. Norbert -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [steering-discuss] decision on screenshots
Hi :) The precise problem i have with the amended wording is that it reverses the meaning of the 2 paragraphs. Florian did a minor adjustment but your's completely changes it to say the opposite of the original. I suspect that no-one on the SC or BoD has any legal training or experience in this area of law even for just the US let alone globally. The couple of experienced legal professionals that were able to let the list know their opinions last time are probably not thrilled with the idea of again spending time to give advice again about the same issue. Can the SC stand by a decision it made a couple of months ago or not? Should we ignore legal opinion and go with whatever seems like common sense? Regards from Tom :) From: Simon Phipps si...@webmink.com To: steering-discuss@documentfoundation.org Sent: Tue, 9 August, 2011 0:06:03 Subject: Re: [steering-discuss] decision on screenshots :-) What is the precise issue you have with the proposed amended language, Tom? Please be specific so we aren't just appealing to the gallery here. I assert that the language I am proposing is a minor change that has the same effect as the earlier text but ensures we do not leave hostages to fortune. Are there any others sharing Tom's concern please? S. /:-) On 8 Aug 2011, at 23:59, Tom Davies wrote: Hi :) There were a reasonable amount of +1s to the first draft produced by Florian and no-one voted against it then or after the meeting. We had just heard the advice of a couple of legal people one of whom specialises in this type of area. Regards from Tom :) From: Norbert Thiebaud nthieb...@gmail.com To: steering-discuss@documentfoundation.org Sent: Mon, 8 August, 2011 18:41:05 Subject: Re: [steering-discuss] decision on screenshots On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 8:43 AM, Tom Davies tomdavie...@yahoo.co.uk wrote: Hi :) I think that unnecessarily exposing TDF (or people doing work for it) to a risk in a way that could NOT be fix easily quickly would be really dumb. It is an easily avoidable risk. I think it is unnecessary to worry about fabricated convoluted legal scenario without precedent. The fact that one person is ignorant of the risk (or chooses to ignore it) does not mean the rest of the Steering Committee are. Did you pool the steering committee member individually ? what basis do you have to claim that just _one person_ think that this legal angle to force a POV is a strawman ? Indeed, there was a meeting that came up with the rough draft of the 2 paragraphs prepared by Florian. There is still no mention of where the responsibility would lay if the perceived risk did happen but as the meeting wrote it, the potential threat should be avoided by using GnuLinux if easily possible. using Linux and/or Gnu does not avoid the alleged risk. Neither own the copyright on icons that would be displayed in a screen-shoot. With GnuLinux screen-shots there is NO risk. It also means the Documentation Team can keep doing what they are already doing = aiming towards professionally consistent documentation. Yes the 'consistent' argument is indeed valid... but the so-called legal risk is a straw man The licensing of GnuLinux tends to be copy-left allowing people to copy and adapt anything they like. By contrast the Windows Eula is very restrictive The Eula could demand that you give away your first born child, that would still not make that the Law. actually the French version of the EULA for Windows 7 Basic, Section 27, spell out clearly that Eula does not trump the Law of the Land. and people in the discussion even highlighted paragraphs that showed that any editing of screen-shots in a way that would make them useful for documentation would be a violation. There was a suggestion earlier in the discussion that if TDF did get clobbered by MS for using screen-shots on their OSes then it could 1. Let MS target individuals that produced the screen-shots or 2. TDF could counter-sue the individuals themselves Apparently we don't even need Microsoft to conduct FUD campaign, we do just fine on our own :-( The post also suggested that TDF should reject any documentation that was produced using non-Windows screen-shots. In the MS vs TomTom case. TomTom were forced to pay substantial damages to MS for saving data. What patent do screen-shoots infringe ? And how did you get access to confidential settlement terms ? http://news.cnet.com/8301-13860_3-10206988-56.html : Specific financial terms were not disclosed. [snip irrelevant US-patent non-sens ] Yes, everyone is exposed to a large number of unknown risks of a variety of types but this is a known risk that is easy to avoid. Why ask people to beat their head against a wall when they could just walk around the corner? Or just easily not enocurage those
Re: [steering-discuss] addition to trademark policy
Hi :) I think Italo would have alerted us if there was a problem. Or someone else if he hadn't noticed it. Regards from Tom :) From: Florian Effenberger flo...@documentfoundation.org To: steering-discuss@documentfoundation.org Sent: Sun, 7 August, 2011 11:59:15 Subject: Re: [steering-discuss] addition to trademark policy Hi, Tom Davies wrote on 2011-08-06 13:54: Has the marketing or Branding team (or reps here) approved of either this version or the original? Since both have very much the same meanings i think approval of either would be good enough. everyone involved should be subscribed to the steering-discuss list, so they can give their comments if they want. :) Florian -- Florian Effenberger flo...@documentfoundation.org Steering Committee and Founding Member of The Document Foundation Tel: +49 8341 99660880 | Mobile: +49 151 14424108 Skype: floeff | Twitter/Identi.ca: @floeff -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [steering-discuss] decision on screenshots
Hi :) That would completely change the statement. It is the opposite of what Florian wrote. Are we going to reopen discussion about the issue again? Regards from Tom :) From: Simon Phipps si...@webmink.com To: steering-discuss@documentfoundation.org Sent: Sun, 7 August, 2011 13:44:24 Subject: Re: [steering-discuss] decision on screenshots The Steering Committee acknowledges that there is a small legal risk involved for screenshots on non-free operating systems, but the risk is deemed low. This is too strong. The fact is, every action any project takes is subject to legal risk. Name one that isn't. All that's happened here is that (for whatever motive) the theoretical risk has been articulated for (a part of) this case. I'd suggest saying: The Steering Committee feels that the legal risk involved in using screenshots of non-free desktops in documentation is no greater than any other theoretical risk facing software projects. S. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [steering-discuss] decision on screenshots
Hi :) I thought this issue had been settled with It is noted that several members of the SC acknowledge the existence of a legal risk to display screenshots of LibreOffice on Windows, but the risk is deemed low, therefore, while screenshots on GNU/Linux should be the default ones, screenshots on Windows are also possible. The new wording says the same thing in a much more professional and slick way imo. Marketing and Websites need to be able to use a different platform from Documentation due to their outputs having very different aims and lifespans. The new wording allows that. Regards from Tom :) From: Florian Effenberger flo...@documentfoundation.org To: steering-discuss@documentfoundation.org Sent: Sat, 6 August, 2011 10:15:21 Subject: [steering-discuss] decision on screenshots Hello, as one of my tasks from the previous SC calls, I promised to come up with a slightly modified statement regarding the use of screenshots. Here it is: == Screenshots for documentation, website and marketing should preferably be taken on Linux, but may also be taken on any other operating system. The Steering Committee acknowledges that there is a small legal risk involved for screenshots on non-free operating systems, but the risk is deemed low. == Does this reflect everyone's wishes? What I want to say is: 1. The preferred solution for screenshots is to do them with Linux, but any other operating system is acceptable as well. 2. There is a small legal risk, but we doubt it is of practical relevance. Any native speaker who wants to improve the wording, feel free, but please do not completely change the meaning. :-) The following two items have to be in that statement. I'd like to proceed to voting on the statement soon. Thanks, Florian -- Florian Effenberger flo...@documentfoundation.org Steering Committee and Founding Member of The Document Foundation Tel: +49 8341 99660880 | Mobile: +49 151 14424108 Skype: floeff | Twitter/Identi.ca: @floeff -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [steering-discuss] addition to trademark policy
Hi :) I think the new wording is much clearer. Bullet-points definitely helped imo. The wording seems about as smooth and straight forward as it is likely to get without changing the meanings. It's a LOT less turgid than many simialr things i have read but seems to deal with the legal and Branding issues afaik. Has the marketing or Branding team (or reps here) approved of either this version or the original? Since both have very much the same meanings i think approval of either would be good enough. Regards from Tom :) From: Florian Effenberger flo...@documentfoundation.org To: steering-discuss@documentfoundation.org Sent: Sat, 6 August, 2011 11:47:53 Subject: [steering-discuss] addition to trademark policy Hello, my other task from the last SC calls was to add a note to the trademark policy that helps in understanding when the subline can be used. My proposed change follows: old version: == Proper Form: TDF marks should be used in their exact form, neither abbreviated nor combined with any other word or words. TDF has a set of acceptable logos for general use. If you are not sure where they are please inquire on our lists. Only the logos that bear the exact mention of the software name with the mention “The Document Foundation” are reserved for the sole and official use of TDF as an entity, for instance on splash screens from software builds compiled by the Document Foundation or DVD labels officially stemming from the Document Foundation. You may not use this set of logos but only the logos bearing the software name without the Document Foundation's mention. == new version: == Proper Form: TDF marks should be used in their exact form, neither abbreviated nor combined with any other word or words. TDF has a set of acceptable logos for general use. If you are not sure where they are please inquire on our lists. The logos that bear the exact mention of the software name with the mention The Document Foundation are reserved for two purposes: * the sole and official use of TDF as an entity, for instance on splash screens from software builds compiled by the Document Foundation or on official materials from the legal entity itself * the use within the Projects of the Community - like documentation, marketing or website - when the respective work is prepared and coordinated openly and transparently, on the appropriate communication channels, following the Foundation's and Community's principles /Example: A publisher working on a documentation with a few selected community members is not eligible for use of logos with the mention The Document Foundation, whereas the documentation team itself may freely use it for any project that is coordinated on its mailing lists. You may not use this set of logos for other than the above purposes, but only the logos bearing the software name without the Document Foundation's mention. == Does this make things clear. Shall we embed it, or can we find an easier wording? Thanks, Florian -- Florian Effenberger flo...@documentfoundation.org Steering Committee and Founding Member of The Document Foundation Tel: +49 8341 99660880 | Mobile: +49 151 14424108 Skype: floeff | Twitter/Identi.ca: @floeff -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [steering-discuss] decision on screenshots
Hi :) Well the Documentation Team selected a theme that is very similar to a theme used in Xp, like their silver one, because it gives the best contrast and readability. It's fairly clear that it's on gnulinux tho (imo). http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Documentation/Production#Sample_screenshots For Marketing and Websites Teams attention-grabbing colours, activity and excitement are crucial. High contrast and readability are very very low on their lists of requirements possibly even opposite to what will work well for them. The 3rd paragraph sets teams against each other (or ignore the SC) rather than encouraging them to do their best in their opposite directions. Branding consistently across the teams is NOT trivial! I don't envy them at all in this. Regards from Tom :) From: Christoph Noack christ...@dogmatux.com To: steering-discuss@documentfoundation.org Sent: Sat, 6 August, 2011 13:57:43 Subject: Re: [steering-discuss] decision on screenshots Hi all, Florian - thank you for this follow up :-) Am Samstag, den 06.08.2011, 11:26 +0100 schrieb Tom Davies: Hi :) I thought this issue had been settled with It is noted that several members of the SC acknowledge the existence of a legal risk to display screenshots of LibreOffice on Windows, but the risk is deemed low, therefore, while screenshots on GNU/Linux should be the default ones, screenshots on Windows are also possible. The missing part, as David pointed out, was that only Windows has been covered. But we have also users (thus: marketing material and documentation) for Mac OS X users. However, there is one tiny thing missing (to me) in Florians draft, so I'd like to tweak it a bit. (I feel free to do so on the sc-discuss list, since I've been originally asked to summarize the status for an earlier meeting). [...] From: Florian Effenberger flo...@documentfoundation.org [...] == Screenshots for documentation, website and marketing should preferably be taken on Linux, but may also be taken on any other operating system. The Steering Committee acknowledges that there is a small legal risk involved for screenshots on non-free operating systems, but the risk is deemed low. == Does this reflect everyone's wishes? What I want to say is: 1. The preferred solution for screenshots is to do them with Linux, but any other operating system is acceptable as well. The original issue (on the different mailing lists) also contained the what visible desktop environment, what theming should be used. Defining that is (in my opinion) up to the teams, so I'd like to ask the SC to encourage the community to find a rather consistent appearance. 2. There is a small legal risk, but we doubt it is of practical relevance. Fully agreed. Any native speaker who wants to improve the wording, feel free, but please do not completely change the meaning. :-) The following two items have to be in that statement. So, only the third paragraph added ... and GNU/Linux instead of Linux. == Screenshots for documentation, website and marketing should preferably be taken on GNU/Linux, but may also be taken on any other operating system. The Steering Committee acknowledges that there is a small legal risk involved for screenshots on non-free operating systems, but the risk is deemed low. The Steering Committee recommends a consistent visual appearance (e.g. theming) for the screenshots taken on the selected operating system. It is up to the LibreOffice community how to achieve that consistency. == Being also a non-native speaker (English), I'm happy if someone could proofread this as well. Thanks! I'd like to proceed to voting on the statement soon. Hopefully today :-) Cheers, Christoph -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [steering-discuss] funding for system operations meeting
Hi :) I think that in the specific case of David it would be smart to invite him to join the sys-admin team. I do appreciate it might not be good to allow everyone to join as and when they feel like it but David is a significant contributor to the docs team in that role. If he isn't invited to join then out will be missing out on a lot of talent there. Ideally there would be someone from the Brazilian Team too to spread the load internationally but i don't know of anyone in any other team that has shown David's level of commitment and skill in that particular type of role. To be fair i am not on the Brazilian lists so they might have someone too. Regards from Tom :) From: Thorsten Behrens t...@documentfoundation.org To: David Nelson li...@traduction.biz Cc: steering-discuss@documentfoundation.org Sent: Wed, 3 August, 2011 9:36:08 Subject: Re: [steering-discuss] funding for system operations meeting David Nelson wrote: My point is that the sysadmins team is perhaps not developing the right culture in terms of openness and participation, and that it would be good to open it up a bit. This is my 2 cents, others may not see things like that, but... Hi David, I indeed disagree here. The admin team for our central infrastructure (in contrast to e.g. auxiliary sites, staging systems etc.) will always be a small closely-knit team of people, with lots of mutual trust ideally personal relations. There's a fundamental difference between sysadmin and e.g. hacking work, in terms of accountability, auditability, liability, reviewability, reversibility the probability to royally fsck things up. So applying the same yard stick to both groups will not work. Let's meet in Paris talk things through over a beer though. :) Cheers, -- Thorsten -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [steering-discuss] Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Base record access unacceptably slow
Hi :) The difference is that 1. those other things basically work 2. people are working on them 3. new people are attracted to work on them In complete contrast Base apparently has 1. NO-ONE working on it 2. It doesn't work 3. It's horribly complicated Base is the only app that almost every question can only be solved by getting stuck into coding or extensively trouble-shooting and regression-testing dependencies. Problems in other apps tend to be able to be solved by normal office users that may have no programming skills at all. It seems that we have 3 possible routes 1. Ignore the problems and watch as Base continues to crumble away and lie to new users that we have a database program when we really don't. 2. Drop Base and be honest that we don't have an integrated database program. 3. Step-up and manage. Regards from Tom :) From: Michael Meeks michael.me...@novell.com To: steering-discuss@documentfoundation.org Sent: Mon, 1 August, 2011 12:54:23 Subject: Re: [steering-discuss] Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Base record access unacceptably slow On Wed, 2011-07-27 at 19:26 +0100, Tom Davies wrote: I think most of the companies i mentioned already employ devs to work on projects relevant to those organisations. If they could each give one person half a week to Base Sure - but if they could each give one person have a week to: improving the UI, accelerating import, fixing most annoying bugs, creating unit tests, ... insert any number of potential problems - then we could also make progress. However - instead of this, we have people complaining and trying to tell other people what to do :-) That actually kills developer time, because they have to respond to the griping by pointing out the obvious lack of resources, the way that reality is shaped - and asking people to be more constructive with their time - by actually getting involved fixing things. If some of those companies had direct control over half a dev So - if some individuals, who have direct control over their own work schedule, could sit down and contribute then we'd get a long way too :-) right ? I don't think TDF can afford to wait until people get annoyed enough (as RMS suggests) because it's easier for people to just stay with other products and the rest of the Suite they come with. A little work and leadership in taking Base forwards might even attract a lot of volunteers to it instead or runing for the hills. So - go for it ! you want to win eternal fame glory, and find yourself a well paid job hacking base: sign up now - get experienced with the code, improve it, make noise about your success. Failing that - your resourcing concerns belong on a single list: the discuss list. Most of the co-operatives i have worked in have paid consultants, part-time workers, accountants, lawyers and all the rest when and where needed. Many of the ones that refused to do so folded or got absorbed. Fine - so start a co-operative to work on LibreOffice, and fund these guys to do the work you want to tell them to do, and to meet your particular priorities. Failing that, do some fund raising yourself to get an existing bespoke development company (say Lanedo) to do the work for you. All the best, Michael. -- michael.me...@novell.com , Pseudo Engineer, itinerant idiot -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [steering-discuss] Re: trademark use request
Hi :) Thanks Alex. It's always good to hear the legal fact rather than the rest of us just guessing at what seems reasonable. Presumably the org has to be spelled out in full? Can it say on behalf of TDF? Something like The LibreOffice trademark is registered to Freies Office Deutschland Verein on behalf of The Document Foundation. ? For some reason your post arrived in my inbox a long long time after it normally 'should' have done. I think it's my @#a! email client as it has happened to a few other posts too but i am still not happy with the idea of changing it. Apols and regards from Tom :) From: Alexander Thurgood alex.thurg...@gmail.com To: steering-discuss@documentfoundation.org Sent: Sun, 31 July, 2011 11:03:50 Subject: [steering-discuss] Re: trademark use request Le 31/07/11 10:21, Florian Effenberger a écrit : Hi Florian, legally, the German association Freies Office Deutschland e.V. is the current trademark holder, as TDF doesn't exist as legal entity yet. Ideally then, reference should be made to the FOD Verein and not to TDF. Not mentioning the name of the rights holder at all opens the person who publicises such a mark on their product to allegations of fraud, trademark infringement, and false assertion of rights (jurisdiction dependent as always of course), including via third parties (i.e. it doesn't require TDF to take positive action). Trademark law can be a real pain at times :-)). In general, this is relatively low risk stuff. Alex -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [steering-discuss] funding for system operations meeting
Hi :) I think the SC just voted on the 600 euroes excess. I think the full amount might need another vote. Coincidentally i think there is an Sc Meeting tonight(?) so it could be done quite quickly there? Perhaps vote on the full amount first and if that gets defeated then vote on the excess? I think there also needs to be some thought about Base. Should it be dropped from LO since it's not getting any attention? If TDF wants to keep Base is it prepared to recruit an employee as a dev or legal expert or team-leader (or a bit of all those) to properly build a good team to deal with the vast amount of complex issues that Base is suffering from? I think the money is there and should be used. I think Some supporters such as RedHat, Cannonical and Google might be willing to help but i think TDF needs to drive it. Regards from Tom :) From: Drew Jensen d...@baseanswers.com To: steering-discuss@documentfoundation.org Sent: Fri, 29 July, 2011 17:03:15 Subject: Re: [steering-discuss] funding for system operations meeting On Fri, 2011-07-29 at 17:46 +0200, Florian Effenberger wrote: Hi, Norbert Thiebaud wrote on 2011-07-29 17:35: Now you are getting me really confused. Who decided what, and who is paying what ? the board of directors of the German association, which will stay an independent entity also after TDF has been funded, but in the meantime is the legal entity behind TDF, decided that in their board of director's meeting. So, a decision by the German association, *not* by the TDF SC. OK - that sounds as if the decision by the FrODev BOD was to expend the 1,000 euro from the FrODev account, not the the TDF account, yes? However, since more money then offered by the German association is needed, and the weekend was for the TDF admins, Actual costs exceeded projection by 60%. I'd like to ask if the SC is agreeing to spending some of the TDF money for it. Is the SC agreeing then to pay the entire 1,600 euro from the TDF fund now, or just the 600 excess? Thanks, Drew -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [steering-discuss] funding for system operations meeting
Hi :) So the work was done for TDF but the decision to do the work was taken by one of the communities. I thought the event was a different one. One that had been discussed in here. I remember people using the mailing list to meet up for further discussion at the end of one of the days but i guess that was a different event? Since TDF does have plenty of money to cover the short-fall i think it should. We don't want to discourage people from doing work that benefits TDF! I do agree with David's earlier post that it would be good for the SC and BoD know about events in advance. If the SC or BoD had been asked in advance then i'm fairly sure they would have agreed to pay about half if the other half was being paid by a community group. The problem is that the decision should have been put to the SC/BoD in advance. I think agree to it this time but avoid it in the future? Regards from Tom :) From: Florian Effenberger flo...@documentfoundation.org To: steering-discuss@documentfoundation.org Sent: Fri, 29 July, 2011 16:46:03 Subject: Re: [steering-discuss] funding for system operations meeting Hi, Norbert Thiebaud wrote on 2011-07-29 17:35: Now you are getting me really confused. Who decided what, and who is paying what ? the board of directors of the German association, which will stay an independent entity also after TDF has been funded, but in the meantime is the legal entity behind TDF, decided that in their board of director's meeting. So, a decision by the German association, *not* by the TDF SC. However, since more money then offered by the German association is needed, and the weekend was for the TDF admins, I'd like to ask if the SC is agreeing to spending some of the TDF money for it. Florian -- Florian Effenberger flo...@documentfoundation.org Steering Committee and Founding Member of The Document Foundation Tel: +49 8341 99660880 | Mobile: +49 151 14424108 Skype: floeff | Twitter/Identi.ca: @floeff -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [steering-discuss] Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Base record access unacceptably slow
Hi :) I imagined the different lists would take the discussion in different directions relevant to their own part of this problem. I think most of the companies i mentioned already employ devs to work on projects relevant to those organisations. If they could each give one person half a week to Base, to collaborate much as volunteers do, then we could get somewhere other than backwards = which is where we are going right now and have been for a long time. It's going to need more than just 1 talented person to sort it out because skills are needed in different directions. Base is a major blocker to desktop ( small office) GnuLinux uptake (ok, games are and multimedia too but that's outside our scope). If some of those companies had direct control over half a dev in LibreOffice then they could offer a very high level of support to clients in the future especially if the half had an indepth knowledge of Base by then. I don't think TDF can afford to wait until people get annoyed enough (as RMS suggests) because it's easier for people to just stay with other products and the rest of the Suite they come with. A little work and leadership in taking Base forwards might even attract a lot of volunteers to it instead or runing for the hills. Most of the co-operatives i have worked in have paid consultants, part-time workers, accountants, lawyers and all the rest when and where needed. Many of the ones that refused to do so folded or got absorbed. Regards from Tom :) From: Michael Meeks michael.me...@novell.com To: steering-discuss@documentfoundation.org; Tom Davies tomdavie...@yahoo.co.uk Cc: us...@global.libreoffice.org; documentat...@global.libreoffice.org; hc.stoellin...@aon.at; t...@tomcloyd.com Sent: Wed, 27 July, 2011 18:44:25 Subject: Re: [steering-discuss] Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Base record access unacceptably slow Hi Tom, On Wed, 2011-07-27 at 18:07 +0100, Tom Davies wrote: We need to attract some devs to this project. Preferably paid devs because there is a bit of a quagmire trying to work out which patches have which licences and so which cannot be incorporated into the LGPL and which can. Ho hum; the legal / ownership angle is not so difficult to sort out; usually finding fixing the bugs is more problematic ;-) Your suggestion to get lots of companies to fund more developers is a great one - but can be organisationally problematic. Ultimately I suggest the most reliable way is to find and/or encourage new developers to do the work. There is a great spot for someone to love 'own' base in the project, it's a responsible role, and we'd really appreciate someone to do it. I think those researchers could move into coding or documentation after even perhaps just 3 - 6 months with any luck. How could we get this going forwards before the whole Suite falls over due to the 1 app's failures? This is like RMS' amusing 'myth of the starving genius' :-) If there is a serious bug that annoys enough people: particularly people that are able to understand and build databases (which are near being programmers anyway) - then *surely* if it matters enough, one or other of them will start to dig into the code to fix it. There is no magic bullet here, or other white knights coming to fix bugs in LibreOffice I'm afraid. If we want it done, we have to do it ourselves. If you know what a database is, and how to use it, then you are probable quite able to invest some time in building the latest code and having a poke at it. Sorry, Michael. -- michael.me...@novell.com , Pseudo Engineer, itinerant idiot -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[steering-discuss] Fw: [libreoffice-users] Slovak site
Hi :) Please can you use Reply to all when replying to this or find some other way of including pe...@kubek.sk as he is not subscribed to this list (yet) Regards from Tom :) - Forwarded Message From: Peter Kubek pe...@kubek.sk To: us...@global.libreoffice.org Sent: Wed, 20 July, 2011 8:36:10 Subject: [libreoffice-users] Slovak site Hello, my name is Peter Kubek and I am from Slovak republic. I am owner domain www.libreoffice.sk Can I work on slovak site? sk.libreoffice.org? Thank You Peter Kubek -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@global.libreoffice.org In case of problems unsubscribing, write to postmas...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [steering-discuss] Re: SC call on 27th
Hi :) I think other people already have permissions set so they can unlock (or whatever) the room? That was about the only trouble last time i think but it was a total blocker at the time. This time people have permissions? Regards from Tom :) From: Christoph Noack christ...@dogmatux.com To: Florian Effenberger flo...@documentfoundation.org Cc: steering-discuss@documentfoundation.org Sent: Wed, 20 July, 2011 6:56:21 Subject: [steering-discuss] Re: SC call on 27th Hi Florian, all! Am Dienstag, den 19.07.2011, 10:35 +0200 schrieb Florian Effenberger: Hello, I will not be available for the SC call on the 27th (Wednesday, 1600 UTC), and would like to ask my deputy Christoph Noack to step in. Oh, I have to check that - I'll have some vacation and will be on the road most of the time. Will report back - so my kind request to the other SC guys is to join anyway (consensus related). FYI: The next call is this Saturday, 1400 UTC, and I will join it. The call on the 27th is the one after that. Thanks! For me, its either family birthday party or SC call ... let's see how the part evolves ;-))) Cheers, Christoph -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [steering-discuss] Call for SC-vote: Using (Windows) Screnshots in TDF materials
Hi :) +1 to all this. The agreed wording, that keeps getting repeated, allows screen-shots to be taken in MS Windows. The wording also cleverly allows screen-shots on other platforms. The perceived issue with MS is that MS Office is possibly their main income stream. People might buy 2 or 3 versions of MSO to upgrade that while only upgrading their OS once. If MS see TDF as a threat to that income stream then we can expect them to try to reduce that threat. Hopefully they might do that as fantastically well as they manage to build stable, secure products but we can't rely on that. Oracle fell 'easily' because it wasn't a fight they were particularly interested in but with MS its a crucial part of their business, especially if we get onto the Cloud or when people realise the Cloud is a pipe-dream and deeply flawed. Regards from Tom :) From: Olivier Hallot olivier.hal...@documentfoundation.org To: steering-discuss@documentfoundation.org Sent: Mon, 18 July, 2011 18:30:06 Subject: Re: [steering-discuss] Call for SC-vote: Using (Windows) Screnshots in TDF materials Hi my vote is to use MS Windows screenshots, for windows-only situations (as in the install) Thanks and regards 2011/7/18 André Schnabel andre.schna...@gmx.net Hi, in our latest SC-Call we discussed the issue about taking and publishing Screenshots on windows. As we had no quorum in the call, I'd ask every SC member / deputy to vote on the statement we agreed in the call. The statement is: It is noted that several members of the SC acknowledge the existence of a legal risk to display screenshots of LibreOffice on Windows, but the risk is deemed low, therefore, while screenshots on GNU/Linux should be the default ones, screenshots on Windows are also possible. Meeting minutes are at: http://wiki.**documentfoundation.org/TDF/**Steering_Committee_Meetings#** Minutes_2011-07-13http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/TDF/Steering_Committee_Meetings#Minutes_2011-07-13 regards, André -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+help@** documentfoundation.org steering-discuss%2bh...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.**documentfoundation.org/** Netiquette http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.**documentfoundation.org/www/** steering-discuss/http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- Olivier Hallot Founder and Steering Commitee Member The Document Foundation -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[steering-discuss] wikipedia
Hi :) I found a page about Calc in Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenOffice.org_Calc but it's heavily branded as the OpenOffice version. Writer has 2 pages. One for OpenOffice and 1 for LibreOffice. Would it be better to move towards having just 1 page for each application and then link to OpenOffice, LibreOffice or NeoOffice when appropriate? Specific pages such as the OpenOffice Calc page could then be extremely short and very specific since most of the stuff would already be either in the main cross-product page for Calc or in Apache's documentation? I imagine each of the 2 lists will diverge in particular points but i don't think everything needs to be repeated on both lists. Regards from Tom :) -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [steering-discuss] wording on TDF website
Hi :) Thanks Christian Lohmaier David ;) [bows] Regards from Tom :) From: Florian Effenberger flo...@documentfoundation.org To: steering-discuss@documentfoundation.org Sent: Thu, 14 July, 2011 8:58:46 Subject: Re: [steering-discuss] wording on TDF website Hi, Tom Davies wrote on 2011-07-12 15.54: Ahah, this is the email i have been looking for. I really like the idea of a link so that people can check the latest news about progress. It is an independent self-governing meritocratic Foundation, currently in the process of being established by leading members of the OpenOffice.org Community. that change has been incorporated now. Thanks a lot, Florian -- Florian Effenberger flo...@documentfoundation.org Steering Committee and Founding Member of The Document Foundation Tel: +49 8341 99660880 | Mobile: +49 151 14424108 Skype: floeff | Twitter/Identi.ca: @floeff -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [steering-discuss] Re: screen-shots Documentation Team
Hi :) I agree with Italo that the different teams have different requirements to achieve different results. Marketing and Website is tactical and dynamic, able to change fairly quickly. Sometimes being highly responsive, sometimes anticipating, sometimes getting far ahead of the game. Quick, attractive, flashy. I tend to think of knights and bishops. Mostly knights. Documentation is a lot more static and less easy to change. I tend to think of rooks and that castling manoeuvre to keep the king safe. Very different aims. People in Documentation tend to aim at being consistent within documentation. Marketing and the website often needs to show off the variety and diversity but that would just be confusing and distracting within documentation. Regards from Tom :) From: David Nelson li...@traduction.biz To: steering-discuss@documentfoundation.org Sent: Wed, 13 July, 2011 13:00:37 Subject: Re: [steering-discuss] Re: screen-shots Documentation Team Hi, So I'd just like to bring this thread back to its real topic: platforms used to take screenshots for documentation, website images and marketing material. I updated the SC confcall agenda item, proposing this motion for discussion: Do we want to see screenshots taken indifferently from Windows, Mac and *nix used in LibreOffice documentation, website images and marketing material, to demonstrate our true cross-platform vocation? Or, do we want to impose preferred use of Linux/Gnome for screenshots and only accept screenshots from other OS's and GUIs when strictly necessary for particular cases? -- David Nelson -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [steering-discuss] Reminder: Next SC call in 4,5 hours
Hi :) Ahah, now i see the point of David's post. I think item 2 is not impartially worded. It seems to attempt to make people's minds up for them = to impose random chaos in the documentation! Regards from Tom :) From: Florian Effenberger flo...@documentfoundation.org To: steering-discuss@documentfoundation.org Sent: Wed, 13 July, 2011 12:33:04 Subject: [steering-discuss] Reminder: Next SC call in 4,5 hours Hello, this is just a short reminder that the next SC call will be in 4,5 hours, at 1600 UTC. Details and an editable agenda are at http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/TDF/Steering_Committee_Meetings#Next_Call Looking forward to hearing you! Florian -- Florian Effenberger flo...@documentfoundation.org Steering Committee and Founding Member of The Document Foundation Tel: +49 8341 99660880 | Mobile: +49 151 14424108 Skype: floeff | Twitter/Identi.ca: @floeff -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [steering-discuss] wording on TDF website
Hi :) Well it's really Christian Lohmaier's idea and roughly in one of the directions David was suggesting but thanks for the flowers (as they say). Thanks and regards from Tom :) From: Florian Effenberger flo...@documentfoundation.org To: steering-discuss@documentfoundation.org Sent: Wed, 13 July, 2011 10:59:39 Subject: Re: [steering-discuss] wording on TDF website Hi, Tom Davies wrote on 2011-07-12 15.54: It is an independent self-governing meritocratic Foundation, currently in the process of being established by leading members of the OpenOffice.org Community. indeed, I like this variant! If no one objects, I will change the page tomorrow. Florian -- Florian Effenberger flo...@documentfoundation.org Steering Committee and Founding Member of The Document Foundation Tel: +49 8341 99660880 | Mobile: +49 151 14424108 Skype: floeff | Twitter/Identi.ca: @floeff -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [steering-discuss] Request for changes of Membership Committee
Hi :) Would his description be more accurate if someone changed it from ... David is the LibreOffice community representative in Brazil. to David is a LibreOffice community representative in Brazil. It is difficult to claim someone is representing any community accurately as the whole point about a community is that there are many diverse, probably conflicting, opinions and representing all those opinions in a fair way is very difficult and possibly unlikely to happen. We do what we can but never achieve perfection (hopefully). It is even difficult if the community votes on who is to 'represent them'. Regards from Tom :) From: Claudio F Filho filh...@broffice.org To: steering-discuss@documentfoundation.org Sent: Wed, 13 July, 2011 15:01:27 Subject: Re: [steering-discuss] Request for changes of Membership Committee Hi Em 13-07-2011 09:51, David Emmerich Jourdain escreveu: when I talked to André about helping the MC, I want to make clear that just offer me 'cause I understand that my fluency in some languages can help in the process. If you may evaluate, you can talk with Olivier, with Jesus, with Claudio and some others that could talk to me (in person or not) that I usually was the interpreter for almost everyone from BrOffice, in the FOSS events. Of course, switching between some languages during three or four days, almost makes you forget to speak your primary language, but this doesn't happen in the MC. In my view, David is a good translator, indeed. Concerning to the MC, I think that there must have *Web of Trust* and, here, we got problems in finding a connector for this WoT concerning to David. I think we need people without any problems inside that WoT. Since the begining of TDF, he is using an untrue description in his profile at TDF's website [1]. I have warned core@ already, but this profile is still there. [1]http://www.documentfoundation.org/foundation/ As he cited my name, this is my position about him. Best, Claudio -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [steering-discuss] Request for changes of Membership Committee
Hi :) +1 All things, however unlikely, are possibly possible. I agree that we shouldn't spend much more time on this. I just wondered if there was a quick fix to solve the issue but if it doesn't fix the problem then there is no need to drag the argument back into the spotlight. Regards from Tom :) From: Paulo de Souza Lima paulo.s.l...@varekai.org To: steering-discuss@documentfoundation.org Cc: filh...@broffice.org Sent: Wed, 13 July, 2011 15:27:10 Subject: Re: [steering-discuss] Request for changes of Membership Committee snip / It *could*, but it doesn't mean it *will*, right? Rgds -- Paulo de Souza Lima -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [steering-discuss] Re: screen-shots Documentation Team
Hi :) +1 Regards from Tom :) From: David Nelson li...@traduction.biz To: steering-discuss@documentfoundation.org Sent: Wed, 13 July, 2011 16:34:05 Subject: Re: [steering-discuss] Re: screen-shots Documentation Team Hi Italo, Drew, On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 4:31 PM, Italo Vignoli italo.vign...@gmail.com wrote: As a member of the SC, I would personally avoid to have the SC discuss this issue (which, in my opinion, is not an issue). This is something that teams should discuss internally, and I see the SC get into the discussion only if something unreasonable happens. I will confirm and support this choice during the SC meeting. I noted your change to the agenda item: (Italo: I do not like the way this item for discussion has been worded, according to what has been discussed in the mailing list) I was invited to add an agenda item for discussion, and this is the subject that I'm hoping that the SC will clarify, which arises from multiple past discussions about Windows screenshots. Given the claimed legal sensitivity of the issue, and the claimed legal liability arising from use of Windows screenshots, I feel it is indeed a valid matter to put before the SC for some official guidance/decisions. -- David Nelson -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [steering-discuss] Re: screen-shots Documentation Team
Hi :) I think the question should be Can the documentation team continue to be consistent and use themes that it previously agreed or should it switch to using Windows and therefore make documentation have randomly different themes and OSes for screen-shots? With possible sub-questions to be asked If Windows is chosen then can the SC agree to TDF taking full responsibility if any legal issues crop up as a result? If Windows is chosen then should the nearly completed guides be re-done to use screen-shots from Windows only? Regards from Tom :) From: André Schnabel andre.schna...@gmx.net To: steering-discuss@documentfoundation.org Sent: Wed, 13 July, 2011 16:45:38 Subject: Re: [steering-discuss] Re: screen-shots Documentation Team Hi David, Am 13.07.2011 17:34, schrieb David Nelson: I noted your change to the agenda item: (Italo: I do not like the way this item for discussion has been worded, according to what has been discussed in the mailing list) I was invited to add an agenda item for discussion, and this is the subject that I'm hoping that the SC will clarify, which arises from multiple past discussions about Windows screenshots. Given the claimed legal sensitivity of the issue, and the claimed legal liability arising from use of Windows screenshots, I feel it is indeed a valid matter to put before the SC for some official guidance/decisions. I fully agree with Italo here. The discussion here at the list (and even you comment right now) is focused on the legal implications and what the SC would think of it. Your wording for the agenda item is much broader and requests a general decision on the screenshots independent from possible legal implications. For agenda item 2: a very basic rule for questions to the SC should be that the question should be crystal clear and not be changed half a day before the SC's decision. At the moment I don't even know anymore what the actual question is. regards, André -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [steering-discuss] SC call notes for 2011-07-13
Hi :) I don't think it was controversial! An issue was flagged up but just as something to notice in passing rather than blocking David from helping do good work! Has the limit on the number of people that could usefully help been reached or could David be allowed in? Regards from Tom :) From: André Schnabel andre.schna...@gmx.net To: steering-discuss@documentfoundation.org Sent: Wed, 13 July, 2011 20:09:41 Subject: Re: [steering-discuss] SC call notes for 2011-07-13 Hi, Am 13.07.2011 18:38, schrieb Charles-H. Schulz: Hello all, Here are the notes for our latest SC call: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/TDF/Steering_Committee_Meetings#Minutes_2011-07-13 3 discussion about change in the MC seems to be missing. From my memory it was to approve the requested change, but as my nomination of David (E.J.) was controversal we accept instead Simon's offer to help with the elections. This will be an interim solution anway, as we would need to have MC elections after BoD elections. regards, André (sorry for so short notice - still need to send out welcome messages to new mebers :) ) -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [steering-discuss] SC call notes for 2011-07-13
Hi :) I had to work quite hard to find something to criticise! Regards from Tom :) From: Charles-H. Schulz charles.sch...@documentfoundation.org To: steering-discuss@documentfoundation.org Sent: Wed, 13 July, 2011 18:07:45 Subject: Re: [steering-discuss] SC call notes for 2011-07-13 Hello Tom, I don't use Word but I used different wiki formattings... best, Charles. 2011/7/13 Tom Davies tomdavie...@yahoo.co.uk Hi :) Fantastic :)) A good result for all concerned! Thanks all that attended, especially Charles for taking the notes and Florian for arranging the meeting. The numbering appears to have been done in Word, or perhaps in accordance with Zen principles? A minor issue that has probably already been tidied up by the time you delete/read this email :) Many thanks and regards from Tom :) From: Christoph Noack christ...@dogmatux.com To: steering-discuss@documentfoundation.org Sent: Wed, 13 July, 2011 17:50:36 Subject: Re: [steering-discuss] SC call notes for 2011-07-13 Hi Charles, thanks for the minutes - although I'd like to mention that I missed by a few minutes due to some day work issue :-\ Thus, I removed my name from the list of attendees. Just as an info ... Cheers, Christoph Am Mittwoch, den 13.07.2011, 18:38 +0200 schrieb Charles-H. Schulz: Hello all, Here are the notes for our latest SC call: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/TDF/Steering_Committee_Meetings#Minutes_2011-07-13 3 3 best, Charles. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [steering-discuss] Re: screen-shots Documentation Team
Hi :) +1 to the idea of this being voted on by the SC/BoD without re-arguing the points. I had hoped the discussion would just congratulate the Documentation Team on neatly avoiding potential pitfalls that would take months to fix if MS used it as a side-issue in a any future dealings with them. It makes sense to use primarily Windows screen-shots in marketing, for the reasons Italo stated, but Documentation takes a LOT longer to fix. Inevitably there will be specific sections that focus on individual OSes but the bulk of the documentation tries to stay consistent with itself rather than look randomly thrown together. A flippant vote taken in under 5 mins to change documentation to use Windows screen-shots would result in many months of hard-work for the tiny documentation team and would result in no documentation being out-there until that work gets re-done. Right now there are questions about whether to bother continuing to work at the documentation at all until after the SC/BoD has decided to tell the team how to do their work. If the SC/BoD wants official documentation to be done in a way that demands using Windows screen-shots and also relinquishes any responsibility for the completed work so that individuals might be left facing the full wrath of MS as individuals then i think we can forget about any documentation ever getting done! The question is really about whether to support the Documentation Team or to tell them to re-do everything in Windows and then not support them at all! Have they really wasted their time and effort doing a bad job? Regards from Tom :) From: David Nelson li...@traduction.biz To: steering-discuss@documentfoundation.org Sent: Tue, 12 July, 2011 12:10:42 Subject: Re: [steering-discuss] Re: screen-shots Documentation Team Hi Florian, On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 1:06 PM, Florian Effenberger flo...@documentfoundation.org wrote: we have a public session every week. Oh, sure, but Michael seemed to feel that this might be better discussed in a private session? Would that be the intention? I can sort-of understand that, given the kind of debate that might ensue? In any case, I'll add it to the next agenda and thank you for your permission for that. -- David Nelson -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [steering-discuss] Re: screen-shots Documentation Team
Hi :) +1 I totally agree with all of that :)) It's a relief even if it's not the finalised vote. Thanks Italo :) Regards from Tom :) From: Italo Vignoli italo.vign...@gmail.com To: steering-discuss@documentfoundation.org Sent: Tue, 12 July, 2011 14:09:56 Subject: Re: [steering-discuss] Re: screen-shots Documentation Team Tom Davies wrote: I had hoped the discussion would just congratulate the Documentation Team on neatly avoiding potential pitfalls that would take months to fix if MS used it as a side-issue in a any future dealings with them. It makes sense to use primarily Windows screen-shots in marketing, for the reasons Italo stated, but Documentation takes a LOT longer to fix. Sorry, but I don't see why we should mix two completely different issues. The documentation team sets the rules for documentation, and I don't see why the SC should change these rules if they are - and they are - well thought. On the other hand, marketing has different - short term - needs, which are important for the project but should not be taken as a rule for the entire project. Marketing, sometimes, is very tactical, because of the changing situation of the outside environment. Documentation, on the other hand, is totally strategical, and has long term objectives and rules. So, the two projects should follow two paths according to their short or long term objectives. In my opinion, documentation screenshots can be entirely Linux (unless there is a specific feature on a different OS). At the same time, screenshots that we provide to the media can be entirely Windows (while on the web we can post both Linux and Windows in order to give a choice). -- Italo Vignoli tel: +39.348.5653829 VoIP: +39.02.320621813 it...@libreoffice.it skype italovignoli -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [steering-discuss] wording on TDF website
Hi :) Ahah, this is the email i have been looking for. I really like the idea of a link so that people can check the latest news about progress. It is an independent self-governing meritocratic Foundation, currently in the process of being established by leading members of the OpenOffice.org Community. Regards from Tom :) From: Christian Lohmaier lohmaier+ooofut...@googlemail.com To: steering-discuss@documentfoundation.org Sent: Tue, 12 July, 2011 13:56:53 Subject: Re: [steering-discuss] wording on TDF website Hi *, On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 3:59 AM, David Nelson li...@traduction.biz wrote: I'm assuming this the item you're talking about: It is an independent self-governing meritocratic Foundation, created by leading members of the OpenOffice.org Community. Why not change it to ... currently in the process of being established ... and link to your blogpost describing the current status? http://blog.documentfoundation.org/2011/07/12/status-of-establishing-the-foundation/ ciao Christian -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [steering-discuss] wording on TDF website
Hi :) +1 The images to the right might need to be moved up a little bit too in order to keep the page looking tidy. I think just remove the bullet point and see how the page looks. Regards from Tom :) From: Florian Effenberger flo...@documentfoundation.org To: steering-discuss@documentfoundation.org Sent: Mon, 11 July, 2011 15:10:11 Subject: [steering-discuss] wording on TDF website Hello, I received some complaints that the wording on the TDF website (http://www.documentfoundation.org) is not accurate. While the meta tag correctly states The Document Foundation has the mission of facilitating the evolution of the LibreOffice Community into a new, open, independent, and meritocratic organization over the next few months, the website itself says that TDF is already a foundation, which is not totally correct. I therefore propose we change that text slightly, until we are legally established. Any proposals? Shall we just remove the first bullet point for the moment? Florian -- Florian Effenberger flo...@documentfoundation.org Steering Committee and Founding Member of The Document Foundation Tel: +49 8341 99660880 | Mobile: +49 151 14424108 Skype: floeff | Twitter/Identi.ca: @floeff -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [steering-discuss] Re: screen-shots Documentation Team
Hi :) It is a complex area of Law in most countries. It might be even more than 1 area since we might be dealing with intellectual property rights, other copyright issues, patents contracts. We can easily avoid the whole legal mess by avoiding Windows and Apple screen-shots. We can just use screen-shots from gnulinux distros as the documentation team was happily doing up until Jean popped off on holiday. There are sometimes slight differences but the documentation team has been able to work-around these either through text or by editing the screen-shots a bit. Most companies that have to worry about this sort of thing employ a legal department. I don't think TDF can afford to do that. I also don't think we can afford to take the word of any individuals about how seriously we need to take this sort of issue. So, i would personally recommend that we do as the documentation team agreed to do ages ago and just avoid the potential danger area completely by using screen-shots from organisations that honour copyleft agreements. However, i agree with Alex that we need some sort of statement from the SC to settle the issue at least until the BoD can make a 'permanent' ruling. Apols and regards from Tom :) From: Alexander Thurgood alex.thurg...@gmail.com To: steering-discuss@documentfoundation.org Sent: Fri, 8 July, 2011 9:11:10 Subject: [steering-discuss] Re: screen-shots Documentation Team Le 06/07/11 11:48, Tom Davies a écrit : Everyone : To me, the point has more to do with SC communication. Once again, a topic has raised its head that I considered dealt with, and now it is back on the table. Although not a member of the SC, the question of the legality of screenshot usage and associated platforms for making them has become important enough IMO for a decision to be clearly stated by the SC, so I am submitting this question as a topic for discussion to you all. If there is already a decision somewhere in the archives, or on the wiki, could someone from the SC please point us to it ? If not, please consider this question for discussion as quickly as possible and issue a statement. Alex -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [steering-discuss] Re: screen-shots Documentation Team
Hi :) In the MS vs TomTom case significant 'damages' were awarded to MS because TomTom were using a file-system that could be read by Windows http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_v._TomTom http://en.swpat.org/wiki/Microsoft_v._TomTom_%282008,_USA%29 TomTom 'should' have been paying MS for the privilege of selling a product that worked on MS systems. The issue about Alfresco is a side-issue. It's about trying to disrupt work-flow and doing so 'behind the back' of the established team-leader. While David Jean have spent months setting up good work-flow with lots of discussion in the team Gary just suddenly decided to throw that out and tell new people to use his personal inadequate systems. The team seems to be re-asserting itself now at last. The legal issue about screen-shots is more important. Should we risk using stuff that some people that have legal experience or knowledge tell us is risky or should we stick to using safer screen-shots that look almost identical anyway? I realise that almost is the key-word there but since everyone uses different themes and skins it's impossible to make it all identical for everyone. Regards from Tom :) -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [steering-discuss] sponsoring for the Hackfest
Hi :) I think i would favour Italo's pasta. Does anyone remember the BBC's April 1st documentary on Italian 'vineyard's that supposedly grew pasta instead of grapes? Germany is famous for many things but Italy wins on pasta. Regards from Tom :) From: Florian Effenberger flo...@documentfoundation.org To: steering-discuss@documentfoundation.org Sent: Wed, 6 July, 2011 9:44:58 Subject: Re: [steering-discuss] sponsoring for the Hackfest Hi, Italo Vignoli wrote on 2011-07-05 16.13: I have volunteered for cooking (actually, hacking) pasta at noon, but if someone else covers it on Saturday I am more than happy, and I will concentrate on hacking pasta on Sunday (if no one objects, of course). I definitely will join that session. :-) We could do load balancing with a pasta cluster? :-) Florian -- Florian Effenberger flo...@documentfoundation.org Steering Committee and Founding Member of The Document Foundation Tel: +49 8341 99660880 | Mobile: +49 151 14424108 Skype: floeff | Twitter/Identi.ca: @floeff -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[steering-discuss] Fw: screen-shots Documentation Team
Hi :) It is probably just me being paranoid. I'm sure the people in Documentation Team are robust and intelligent enough to stand their ground. There are a few new people that are very active and wouldn't appreciate being pulled in the wrong direction. It would be great to have a few relevant links or something quotable. Regards from Tom :) - Forwarded Message From: Tom Davies tomdavie...@yahoo.co.uk To: steering-discuss@documentfoundation.org Sent: Wed, 6 July, 2011 10:48:31 Subject: screen-shots Documentation Team Hi The documentation team has been told by various people (over the past several months) that taking screen-shots in Windows could put us at risk. Since those people appeared to have some level of legal awareness or in some cases read and quoted the Windows Eulas the team decided to make it part of the re-branding work to protect us from that sort of vulnerability. Now a single individual quotes from a children's fairy story saying the sky is not falling, as Chicken Little imagined. and says that people have wasted time re-branding because MS never takes any organisations or people to court over patent infringements. Gary is also telling people to abandon the established work-flow and use his own personal websites to do the work instead of using the Alfresco websites and ODFauthors places that the Documentation Team established that protect works under copyleft licences that were also agreed within the team. He has carefully timed his advice to coincide with the person the team sees as leader going away on holiday. Can anyone point me to a list of MS court actions or specific parts of the Windows Eula that might put us at risk? A quick google search on the Tom Tom case gave me http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_v._TomTom Can anyone give me more relevant examples? The documentation team is very small and needs a lot of support right now. David is doing great work at developing the functionality of the Alfresco sites and i had hoped that we could just get on with doing the work while Jean was away rather than dealing with a power-grab and disruptive actions seemingly designed to drive morale through the floor. Regards from Tom -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [steering-discuss] Joining the OASIS Consortium
From: sophie gautier.sop...@gmail.com To: steering-discuss@documentfoundation.org Sent: Sat, 18 June, 2011 12:51:17 Subject: Re: [steering-discuss] Joining the OASIS Consortium Hi all, On 18/06/2011 09:58, Florian Effenberger wrote: Hi, klaus-jürgen weghorn ol wrote on 2011-06-16 08.18: If you do it in 2 months there will be (soon) a voted Board of Directors to determine this. Maybe the SC - as non-voted - only give a recommendation for the BoD and put it all in this direction put don't fix it. So it will be a (first) decision of the new BoD. Otherwise the BoD has to fix something they don't voted of (and maybe don't want to do). this is indeed a good point... what do the others think? We can give our +1 as recommendation to the new BoD, but I guess it will indeed be hard to bind them on decisions they have not taken. No problem for me as long as TDF is represented. Kind regards Sophie Hi :) Some organisations vote only a 3rd of positions each time. Specific legally required roles such as Company Secretary, Finance/Treasurer and Chair are sometimes nominated from existing board members although often the newly elected board members are included. Since those elections are normally held annually it means each board member is committing to 3 years. So, perhaps for TDF it might be better to have the rolling elections every 6months with the legally required posts being voted on annually. This system ensures that 2/3rd majority are stable, established, experienced board members that are already up to speed on relevant issues. It gives external organisations confidence that agreements are not going to be suddenly over-turned just after the AGM. It helps new board members to quickly learn their way around. It helps to get fresh blood and a new perspective, a new energy into the board without compromising stability. I think this first time all the positions need to be voted on but hopefully that will mostly be a case of voting in people that already do a great job. Italo, Sophie, Cor and of course Florian are highly visible, well regarded and do an excellent job but i would guess there are others i don't notice that also do crucially important work. It might be another thing that is good to discuss now to present recommendations to the BoD but it might be better to wait and let them discuss this sort of thing after elections. Regards from Tom :) -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [steering-discuss] Joining the OASIS Consortium
From: Florian Effenberger flo...@documentfoundation.org To: steering-discuss@documentfoundation.org Sent: Sat, 18 June, 2011 19:18:40 Subject: Re: [steering-discuss] Joining the OASIS Consortium Hi, Charles-H. Schulz wrote on 2011-06-18 16.50: I think that if we go down that path we'll lose some valuable time revoting on it. The SC's mission ends when the BoD is elected and that is very clear, but until then, if decisions have to be made we should not refrain from making them. (Although I understand the need not to rush anything - but joining the OASIS is not exactly a rushed decision). well, I have no problem with deciding, but still, decisions are not binding for the future BoD, so we should keep that in mind. :-) Florian Hi :) For things such as annual subscriptions and stuff it makes sense to deal with it now so that the BoD don't have to worry about it until next year. The OASIS thing sounds like a lot of money to me but people that know what it offers are all saying yes, by the sounds of it, so i think maybe just do it. Regards from Tom :) -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [steering-discuss] proposed bylaws changes
Hi :) It would look slightly more normal as: Please read carefully Regards from Tom :) From: Thorsten Behrens t...@documentfoundation.org To: steering-discuss@documentfoundation.org Sent: Thu, 16 June, 2011 6:55:06 Subject: Re: [steering-discuss] proposed bylaws changes Francois Tigeot wrote: There's a small typo at the beginning of the page: Please carfeully read Thx, fixed. Cheers, -- Thorsten -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [steering-discuss] proposed bylaws changes
Hi : Please ignore my last email. I didn't realise the words were part of a sentence rather than being the entire statement. Context is everything i should have checked. It looks good already :) Regards from Tom :) From: Francois Tigeot ftig...@wolfpond.org To: steering-discuss@documentfoundation.org Sent: Thu, 16 June, 2011 5:44:12 Subject: Re: [steering-discuss] proposed bylaws changes On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 01:50:37AM +0200, Thorsten Behrens wrote: If there are no objections by tonight, I'll also change the text on the membership application page (http://www.documentfoundation.org/foundation/application-for-tdf-community-membership/) Done. There's a small typo at the beginning of the page: Please carfeully read -- Francois Tigeot -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [steering-discuss] grammar mistake in the bylaws
Hi :) I wouldn't worry about it. It's fine in business speak. If you do change it then it needs to be more like ... Each organization *can appoint* a single representative to the Advisory Board based on a yearly fee to be determined by the BoD. The problem then is that it's passive and business communications prefer things to sound active. Trying to make it perfect would make it excessively long without gaining anything. It makes sense enough as it is :) Regards from Tom :) From: Florian Effenberger flo...@documentfoundation.org To: steering-discuss@documentfoundation.org Sent: Wed, 15 June, 2011 11:45:50 Subject: [steering-discuss] grammar mistake in the bylaws Hello, is there a slight grammar mistake in the bylaws? They read Each organization *appointing* a single representative to the Advisory Board based on a yearly fee to be determined by the BoD. but should rather be Each organization *appoints* a single representative to the Advisory Board based on a yearly fee to be determined by the BoD. Or am I mistaken? Florian -- Florian Effenberger flo...@documentfoundation.org Steering Committee and Founding Member of The Document Foundation Tel: +49 8341 99660880 | Mobile: +49 151 14424108 Skype: floeff | Twitter/Identi.ca: @floeff -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [steering-discuss] Fwd: Google Alert - libreoffice
Hi :) I thought the GPL, LGPL MPL were all much more permissive than the Apache licenses? I thought the whole point of OpenSource was that it is contra-intuitive. By insisting on intellectual freedoms, ideas are able to build on each other more easily. Regards from Tom :) From: Charles-H. Schulz charles.sch...@documentfoundation.org To: steering-discuss@documentfoundation.org Sent: Tue, 14 June, 2011 8:21:17 Subject: Re: [steering-discuss] Fwd: Google Alert - libreoffice Italo, 2011/6/13 Italo Vignoli italo.vign...@gmail.com It looks like media are on our side. Ask LH: Am I Missing Out By Sticking With Open Source And Not Buying Microsoft ... on Lifehacker Australia http://www.lifehacker.com.au/2011/06/ask-lh-am-i-missing-out-by-sticking-with-open-source-and-not-buying-microsoft-office/ / The Fall Of OpenOffice And Rise Of LibreOffice on Muktware http://www.muktware.com/hacksheet/1399 Bruce Byfield article on Linux Magazine linked by Muktware: http://www.linux-magazine.com/Online/Blogs/Off-the-Beat-Bruce-Byfield-s-Blog/The-Decline-and-Fall-of-OpenOffice.org g This is indeed really good. Now, if IBM really throws in the code from Lotus Symphony, we'll have to be prepared, as some journalists might change their stance... Although probably not :-) Best, Charles. -- Italo Vignoli italo.vign...@gmail.com mobile +39.348.5653829 VoIP +39.02.320621813 skype italovignoli -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [steering-discuss] proposed bylaws changes
Hi :) I think it is better to do the minimum that is required to make it legal and for the rest write in things like Mid-term replacements are to be covered by internal TDF policy which is to be reviewed regularly. In some cases it makes sense to name the specific document that will cover that particular policy but even that can make things unnecessarily restrictive in the future. Please avoid setting things in stone where it's not required by law. Regards from Tom :) From: Florian Effenberger flo...@documentfoundation.org To: steering-discuss@documentfoundation.org Sent: Tue, 14 June, 2011 8:01:36 Subject: Re: [steering-discuss] proposed bylaws changes Hi Toki, toki wrote on 2011-06-10 19.16: When I was reading German law on non-profits, my impression was the By-Laws had to specify how members of the board of directors, and any advisory board were selected, and mid-term replacements done. I don't see anything in the by-laws that specifies how mid-term replacements are done. Is that not legally required? we have some rules on that, like Each member of the BoD must appoint one Community Member as deputy who can replace her/him in case of need, and who has the same rights during her/his period of absence or unavailability. or The Chairperson can be discharged and replaced by the BoD at any time. However, it indeed might be needed that we incorporate some more details into the binding statutes we are currently preparing. I have details on this soon. Thanks for pointing this out! Florian -- Florian Effenberger flo...@documentfoundation.org Steering Committee and Founding Member of The Document Foundation Tel: +49 8341 99660880 | Mobile: +49 151 14424108 Skype: floeff | Twitter/Identi.ca: @floeff -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [steering-discuss] proposed bylaws changes
Hi :) I thought everyone quickly checked that sort of thing anyway? I do. I thought David was making a joke out of the need for people to be a little more aware of one need for checking such rules. A serious point put forwards as a joke. Regards from Tom :) From: Florian Effenberger flo...@documentfoundation.org To: steering-discuss@documentfoundation.org Sent: Tue, 14 June, 2011 7:56:24 Subject: Re: [steering-discuss] proposed bylaws changes Hi, Michael Meeks wrote on 2011-06-13 17.19: Counting votes we had: Florian, Charles, Andre, Olivier, Italo and Sophie voting in favour; so I've made all of the edits in the wiki. thanks a lot, Michael! I will ask the German community to translate the changes back. :) Thanks to everyone who contributed! (Oh, and David, I never thought you would do the bank account thing, don't worry ;) Florian -- Florian Effenberger flo...@documentfoundation.org Steering Committee and Founding Member of The Document Foundation Tel: +49 8341 99660880 | Mobile: +49 151 14424108 Skype: floeff | Twitter/Identi.ca: @floeff -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [steering-discuss] proposed bylaws changes
Hi :) Someone mailed me off-list thinking it was my comment and quoted a real-world legal case where someone had really done what you describe. It is an old joke and an obvious thing to avoid but i'm not hugely surprised one bunch of people got fooled into letting it happen! It's impossible to over-estimate human stupidity. Regards from Tom :) - Original Message From: David Nelson comme...@traduction.biz To: steering-discuss@documentfoundation.org Cc: steering-disc...@global.documentfoundation.org Sent: Sat, 11 June, 2011 6:14:45 Subject: Re: [steering-discuss] proposed bylaws changes HI, On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 22:22, David Nelson comme...@traduction.biz wrote: Otherwise, I was only going to add a clause about transferring TDF's funds into my personal bank account every 6 months... For those of you that didn't realise, that was a joke... Someone just mailed me off-list who didn't seem quite sure about that... (rofl) -- David Nelson -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [steering-discuss] FYI: Apache Incubator is now voting
Hi :) I am sure you are welcome to stay in even if it's only to help iron-out any misunderstandings as they arise but if you don't feel comfortable then don't. Sounds like you have been doing good work :) Regards from Tom :) From: Norbert Thiebaud nthieb...@gmail.com To: steering-discuss@documentfoundation.org Cc: disc...@documentfoundation.org Sent: Fri, 10 June, 2011 21:32:35 Subject: Re: [steering-discuss] FYI: Apache Incubator is now voting On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 3:09 PM, Greg Stein gst...@gmail.com wrote: Hi all, I just wanted to bring an FYI that the Apache Incubator has begun its voting process on accepting the OO.o proposal to become a podling within the Incubator. Thanks for the update [...] If you wish to make your voice heard, then I would encourage you to respond to the [VOTE] thread on gene...@incubator.apache.org (I would think gmane[2] is your best way to respond to the thread without having to actually subscribe). I think I had the opportunities, as a guest fof he incubator mailing list to expression my opinions and sometimes more ;-) At this point, I feel it would be over-staying my welcome to interject myself in an Apache procedural vote. Have fun and Good luck with your brand new 'massive' baby :-) Norbert -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [steering-discuss] FYI: Apache Incubator is now voting
Hi :) Thanks :) The voting system sounds interesting. I like the idea of non-binding votes for people that might not have joined as proper members yet but might have significant interest in the Apache Foundation. Thanks and regards from Tom :) From: Greg Stein gst...@gmail.com To: steering-discuss@documentfoundation.org; disc...@documentfoundation.org Sent: Fri, 10 June, 2011 21:09:28 Subject: [steering-discuss] FYI: Apache Incubator is now voting Hi all, I just wanted to bring an FYI that the Apache Incubator has begun its voting process on accepting the OO.o proposal to become a podling within the Incubator. At the moment, it appears to be passing by a huge margin, with only two dissenting votes[1] at this time. The Apache process recognizes two types of votes: * binding votes are from those who have a recognized ability to participate in the process. These votes are the ones which will be counted. * non-binding votes are from other participants in the conversation. Their votes are allowed as a measure and gauge over the broader community opinion, even though they will not actually be tallied in the final ballot. If you wish to make your voice heard, then I would encourage you to respond to the [VOTE] thread on gene...@incubator.apache.org (I would think gmane[2] is your best way to respond to the thread without having to actually subscribe). Cheers, -g [1] the dissenting votes are non-binding, fwiw [2] http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.apache.incubator.general/29904 ps. my advance apologies if you feel this post is inappropriate for these two TDF forums. I felt obliged to include you all in this process, though I do understand that it may not be welcome. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [steering-discuss] proposed bylaws changes
From: Florian Effenberger flo...@documentfoundation.org To: steering-discuss@documentfoundation.org Sent: Thu, 9 June, 2011 9:17:13 Subject: [steering-discuss] proposed bylaws changes Hello, as we are moving forward with legally setting up the foundation, and translate/adapt the bylaws into German, we noticed that some tweaks and simplifications are required - in general we feel the shorter these documents are, the better it is for understanding. Proposed change #1: --- We should replace the words moral commitment (which are rather off-putting to many with a stark view of their integrity and morals) with something softer: from: Every membership applicant must have been active for at least three (3) months, and should make a moral commitment to at least six (6) months activity (not counting the first three (3) months of fulfillment of qualification). to: Every membership applicant must have been active for at least three (3) months, and should make a best effort commitment to continuing their activity for a further six (6) months. Which I hope captures the spirit, without invoking things that cannot be predicted. Proposed change #2: --- Then a separate set of changes cleanups around the Advisory Board: * The /Donor/ definition is not referenced outside of the /Sponsor/ definition, and so should be collapsed into there. * The /Sponsor/ definition is referenced in a redundant, non-normative way by the Members/Contributors definition and should be removed. from: The Community's Members are people who contribute their time, efforts and skills independently (individual persons contributing on either a paid or unpaid basis), or who may work for Sponsors (refer to definition of Sponsors). to: The Community's Members are individuals who contribute their time, efforts and skills whether on a paid or voluntary basis. Proposed change #3: --- * Remove the Sponsors section. This is now only referred to in the Advisory Board definition and sections, and as such can be expanded there. * Expand the Advisory Board definition. from: The Advisory Board represents the Foundation's Sponsors. Each Sponsor is entitled to appoint one representative. For more information, see Advisory Board under Governance. to: The Advisory Board provides a forum for organisations that provide a substantial minimum level of financial, or other support as determined by the BoD to meet with the BoD and provide advice. For more information, see Advisory Board under Governance. Proposed change #4: --- * Re-work the Advisory Board section: from: The Advisory Board [AB] is staffed by Sponsors' representatives (refer to definition of Sponsors). Each Sponsor can have no more than one representative on the Advisory Board. Each Sponsor's representative is appointed for a term of one (1) year, but can be re-appointed for a further year in office at the end of each term. The AB's primary function is to represent The Document Foundation's Sponsors, and to provide the Board of Directors with advice, guidance and proposals. to: The Advisory Board [AB] is staffed, at the BoD's discretion by organisations that havemade a substantial contribution to The Document Foundation. Each organisation appointing a single representative to the Advisory Board based on a yearly fee to be determined by the BoD. The AB's primary function is to represent these organisations by providing the BoD with advice, guidance and proposals. Thoughts? Florian Hi :) +1 I'm not a member or anything so my opinion doesn't count but i especially liked point 2. Point 1 is not perfect grammar but probably translates well. The rest of the points are great too but 2 is my favourite. Regards from Tom :) -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [steering-discuss] proposed bylaws changes
From: David Nelson comme...@traduction.biz To: steering-discuss@documentfoundation.org Sent: Thu, 9 June, 2011 11:24:02 Subject: Re: [steering-discuss] proposed bylaws changes Hi Michael, On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 13:15, Michael Meeks michael.me...@novell.com wrote: Ho hum; I'm personally averse to widespread small changes - they tend not to get the level of review that is required, and we were IMHO very badly burned by the level of un-reviewed change before the bylaws were frozen; that then required extensive expenditure of time (that is still ongoing) to get them into better shape. Personally, I'd like to see all such changes posted here for some sanity checking first along with some justification. We have code review during code freezes, even more so legalese review. I recall that people were requested to read the bylaws properly before voting on the original draft... :-P I would only make strictly *spelling and grammatical* corrections, nothing more. Do I have an OK for that? David Nelson Hi :) I think it is a good idea to do a spelling and grammar check although i suspect that Florian has probably already flagged up the only 4 issues. It would be good for a native En-Us speaker to double-check jic. Given that registration will be done in Germany it is more important to get the German translation reasonably perfect rather than the En-Us version. Alfresco seem to be a great place for storing documents in a way that allows people to reviews and create a working notes file so that when a particular document/rule/guideline/policy is scheduled for review the changes could be discussed and possibly added (if agreed). Regards from Tom :) -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [steering-discuss] proposed bylaws changes
From: David Nelson comme...@traduction.biz To: steering-discuss@documentfoundation.org Cc: steering-disc...@global.documentfoundation.org Sent: Thu, 9 June, 2011 20:22:51 Subject: Re: [steering-discuss] proposed bylaws changes Hi Florian, On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 11:17, Florian Effenberger flo...@documentfoundation.org wrote: Hello, as we are moving forward with legally setting up the foundation, and translate/adapt the bylaws into German, we noticed that some tweaks and simplifications are required - in general we feel the shorter these documents are, the better it is for understanding. Proposed change #1: --- We should replace the words moral commitment (which are rather off-putting to many with a stark view of their integrity and morals) with something softer: from: Every membership applicant must have been active for at least three (3) months, and should make a moral commitment to at least six (6) months activity (not counting the first three (3) months of fulfillment of qualification). to: Every membership applicant must have been active for at least three (3) months, and should make a best effort commitment to continuing their activity for a further six (6) months. Which I hope captures the spirit, without invoking things that cannot be predicted. best-effort Proposed change #2: --- Then a separate set of changes cleanups around the Advisory Board: * The /Donor/ definition is not referenced outside of the /Sponsor/ definition, and so should be collapsed into there. * The /Sponsor/ definition is referenced in a redundant, non-normative way by the Members/Contributors definition and should be removed. from: The Community's Members are people who contribute their time, efforts and skills independently (individual persons contributing on either a paid or unpaid basis), or who may work for Sponsors (refer to definition of Sponsors). to: The Community's Members are individuals who contribute their time, efforts and skills whether on a paid or voluntary basis. and skills, whether on a paid or voluntary basis. (Just adds a comma.) Proposed change #3: --- * Remove the Sponsors section. This is now only referred to in the Advisory Board definition and sections, and as such can be expanded there. * Expand the Advisory Board definition. from: The Advisory Board represents the Foundation's Sponsors. Each Sponsor is entitled to appoint one representative. For more information, see Advisory Board under Governance. to: The Advisory Board provides a forum for organisations that provide a substantial minimum level of financial, or other support as determined by the BoD to meet with the BoD and provide advice. For more information, see Advisory Board under Governance. organizations (US spelling, like everywhere else in the bylaws.) minimum level of financial or other support, as determined by the BoD, to meet with the BoD and provide advice. (Minor punctuation changes.) Proposed change #4: --- * Re-work the Advisory Board section: from: The Advisory Board [AB] is staffed by Sponsors' representatives (refer to definition of Sponsors). Each Sponsor can have no more than one representative on the Advisory Board. Each Sponsor's representative is appointed for a term of one (1) year, but can be re-appointed for a further year in office at the end of each term. The AB's primary function is to represent The Document Foundation's Sponsors, and to provide the Board of Directors with advice, guidance and proposals. to: The Advisory Board [AB] is staffed, at the BoD's discretion by organisations that have made a substantial contribution to The Document Foundation. Each organisation appointing a single representative to the Advisory Board based on a yearly fee to be determined by the BoD. The AB's primary function is to represent these organisations by providing the BoD with advice, guidance and proposals. organization / organizations (US spelling.) That's it... pretty painless, no? ;-P I've proofread the rest of the bylaws in the past so many times I don't think there are any / many spelling / grammar errors in them. Otherwise, I was only going to add a clause about transferring TDF's funds into my personal bank account every 6 months... David Nelson Hi :) Yup +1 I always try to use Uk spellings but i think this has to be American :( Regards from Tom :) -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [steering-discuss] About elections
Hi :) I think 100 is still quite small compared to the numbers of people actually involved. So the list of members is still more like a special-interest sub-set. The founder members are doing a great job and i hope that they stay in place for a long while yet. Regards from Tom :) - Original Message From: Florian Effenberger flo...@documentfoundation.org To: steering-discuss@documentfoundation.org Sent: Mon, 6 June, 2011 10:19:06 Subject: [steering-discuss] About elections Hello everyone, given that the Foundation is close to being created, and that we have now nearly 100 approved members (thanks to the membership committee for their great work!), I guess that in the near future we should think about holding elections for the future board of directors. IIRC, all other roles besides the AB, are then voted on by the BoD. Anyone already had a closer look or is working on that yet? I guess we need some nomination phase, and people taking care of and monitoring the poll, and those should be not amongst the candidates. Florian -- Florian Effenberger flo...@documentfoundation.org Steering Committee and Founding Member of The Document Foundation Tel: +49 8341 99660880 | Mobile: +49 151 14424108 Skype: floeff | Twitter/Identi.ca: @floeff -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [steering-discuss] About elections
- Original Message From: Volker Merschmann merschm...@gmail.com To: steering-discuss@documentfoundation.org Sent: Mon, 6 June, 2011 11:02:56 Subject: Re: [steering-discuss] About elections Hi, 2011/6/6 Florian Effenberger flo...@documentfoundation.org: Tom Davies wrote on 2011-06-06 11.22: I think 100 is still quite small compared to the numbers of people actually involved. So the list of members is still more like a special-interest sub-set. The founder members are doing a great job and i hope that they stay in place for a long while yet. thanks for the flowers, as we say in Germany. :-) Well, there are two things: The steering committee has to end its existence one year after being set in place, which would be, depending on how that needs to be counted, either end of August, or September 28th. In addition, to set up the Foundation in Germany, we need to provide the names of the legal representatives. As we hope to have the legal paperwork finished soon, we also need those names. So, maybe waiting one or two more weeks is possible, but given that we have been accepting members for a few weeks already, I guess the time that is right will come soon ;) I'd like to add that not every contributor wants to be a member of the foundation. Especially those who are payed for the work might not like to have a too personal connection. We can ask the membership committee if there is a reasonable number of applications left which can be finished in the next days. Else we should go ahead for the reasons given by Florian. Volker Hi :) +1 Companies do reasonably often pay shares to employees. This would be slightly different in that the 'shares' do not give a pay-out but similar in that they give workers a say in the organisation. I think paid workers should be encouraged to become members but obviously it is their choice. Regards from Tom :) -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [steering-discuss] About elections
- Original Message From: sophie gautier.sop...@gmail.com To: steering-discuss@documentfoundation.org Sent: Mon, 6 June, 2011 12:10:30 Subject: Re: [steering-discuss] About elections Hi Volker, all, On 06/06/2011 13:02, Volker Merschmann wrote: [...] I'd like to add that not every contributor wants to be a member of the foundation. Especially those who are payed for the work might not like to have a too personal connection. We can ask the membership committee if there is a reasonable number of applications left which can be finished in the next days. Yes there is still several applications, either we have to statute on or that have just arrived since last week. We did had difficulties to meet during May, but we have now a regular meeting on Monday, so that may help to speed the process too. Else we should go ahead for the reasons given by Florian. The time needed to put in place the process to organize the elections would be enough to have the members incorporated by the Committee, so no need to delay, both could run side by side. Also this is often a reproach that the SC members have not been elected, so for me, the sooner the better to have a clear and fair situation. Kind regards Sophie Hi :) Agreed. But the founders have shown good strategic planning and good planning for the future as shown by the way things have played out in the last few weeks. I think it would take time for newly elected people to have such commitment to the long-term vision. I have to point out that i am not a founder and not even a regular member. I've had disagreements and arguments with founders but have always had good reason to respect even the ones i disagree with. Regards from Tom :) -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [steering-discuss] Re: OpenOffice.org Apache Incubator Proposal: Splitting^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^HREUNITING the Community?
- Original Message From: Norbert Thiebaud nthieb...@gmail.com To: steering-discuss@documentfoundation.org Sent: Sat, 4 June, 2011 14:03:55 Subject: Re: [steering-discuss] Re: OpenOffice.org Apache Incubator Proposal: Splitting^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^HREUNITING the Community? On Sat, Jun 4, 2011 at 6:36 AM, Robert Burrell Donkin robertburrelldon...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Jun 4, 2011 at 11:13 AM, Florian Effenberger flo...@documentfoundation.org wrote: Hi Robert, Hi Florian (Copying in Charles since he asked a similar question off list) I'm still reading a few messages and trying to reply to them, but wanted to join in here: Just like the rest of us :-) Noisy and open - everyone with an opinion is welcome :-) Robert Burrell Donkin wrote on 2011-06-04 09.14: The TDF is in no position to accept a major donation of either copyright or code today. Apache is. Why? AIUI [1] the TDF is not a legal entity today and is still in the process of building it's legal, organisational and process infrastructure. So it was urgent as in a matter of weeks ? I accept it has strong legal backing but today no (related) US non-profit corporation exists which could accept the donation. How is 'US' relevant here ? The Apache Software Foundation provides a suitable legal no-profit organisation and in place today a suitable process to accept large donations of code from major organisations safely through the Incubator. It has considerable experience of opening close source projects and in working with rich downstream ecologies. Opening close source ? how is it relevant here ? The proposal is to relicense an open-source project... unless I missed something the proposal concern OOo.org not Symphony right ? Can you elaborate? IMHO LibreOffice community finds itself in a similar position to the Apache group in the mid-90s. Great community. Fantastic momentum. Cool product. But establishing code provenance and the Apache Software Foundation (ASF) took a(n unexpectedly) large amount of time and energy. Establishing suitable licenses and agreements took time and energy over several iterations. Establishing a sound Incubation process took time and energy over many iterations. It took time for us to learn and evolve secure processes which don't completely suck. That is all good, but irrelevant. we already have a license and we would not need to incubate anything: the code base you are trying to digest is our daily chore... It has already graduated as a top level project even better as THE top level project. The TDF is at the start of a journey that the ASF started a decade ago and is yet to reach the end. As far as OOo.org is concerned, it is the other way around. The TDF may wish to consider whether an alternative path might achieve their aims faster... Well, take a look: http://www.libreoffice.org/download/ I'm pretty sure that we've got nice head start... Norbert Hi :) Yes, i think most people (lurkers) here only speak for themselves, not as representatives of TDF, except perhaps the founder members. The timing of this was surely chosen by Oracle rather than TDF or Apache? I'm paranoid enough to think that Oracle deliberate chose this approximate timing months ago, perhaps before September. That same paranoia leads me to suspect that Oracle chose Apache to give Apache a 'mill-stone', something to sink time resources into without getting anything positive back, hence distracting Apache from any on-going fights with Oracle. Luckily, i think, they have chosen the 'wrong' people and the 'wrong' product. Despite the efforts of Oracle since September and before OpenOffice is still a good product with a good reputation and Apache are exactly the sort of people most likely to be able to recover that position fast and develop from there while doing so. Also i think Oracle seriously underestimated how Apache are more likely to work well with TDF, perhaps in co-operative competition or perhaps joining TDF and resourcing a percentage of development here. At the very worst it's to keep both products in the news which gives us both a level of free marketing. Perhaps we should work at appearing to compete more than we really do while splitting development costs between each other by sharing fixes and updates etc? Regards from Tom :) -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [steering-discuss] Re: OpenOffice.org Apache Incubator Proposal: Splitting^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^HREUNITING the Community?
- Original Message From: Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com To: gene...@incubator.apache.org Cc: Robert Burrell Donkin robertburrelldon...@gmail.com; steering-discuss@documentfoundation.org Sent: Sat, 4 June, 2011 19:12:45 Subject: [steering-discuss] Re: OpenOffice.org Apache Incubator Proposal: Splitting^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^HREUNITING the Community? On Jun 4, 2011, at 9:03 AM, Charles-H. Schulz wrote: We have been developing our governance and structure for 8 months. People have put their trust and their faith in us. Why would you want us to scrap that off in favor of something else and have people follow a governance they don't even know? How can one respond to the question (and the original one that predicated this one) without someone misinterpreting it as confrontational, self-serving or condescending? One issue that was, from all I have been told and heard, is that having OOo at some place with a known track record, with real FOSS street cred and the ability to work with other FOSS organizations as well as commercial entities was important. That it wasn't just getting rid of OOo but instead placing it someplace where it had the best chance to growth, thrive and prosper. I've also been told that Oracle and TDF did discuss moving OOo there, but that in addition to some requirements that were unacceptable, that TDF was still a foundation-in-creation. Reading over the blogs, it is even admitted that the complexity and time involved in creating one was underestimated. The concern was putting the life and longevity of OOo into, basically, an unknown quantity. With that in mind, the ASF (or Eclipse) is much different. We've been a foundation since 1999, and an active force since 1994. We have a legal structure, a non-profit 501(c)3 status, existing infrastructure, a healthy fundraising effort, a methodology and governance model that is copied and well respected, and a proven track record of building exceptional FOSS projects and communities. There are *obvious* things that, with OOo in mind, the ASF lacks that TDF has in spades: the build and distribution system is the one which has been mentioned most of all. There are things that the TDF lacks that the ASF has in spades. I don't see why we can't work together to use each other to fill in the holes that the other lacks. P.S. I am again reminded by people (privately, in order to keep the noise down a bit) that although TDF is a major player in the OOo space, it is not just the ASF and TDF, but *everyone*. Hi :) I think there is a lot of confusion and mis-information out-there. Oracle seems to have an extremely bad reputation in FOSS communities. All the FOSS projects that Sun used to run almost immediately forked as soon Oracle started to take over, except perhaps VirtualBox. While TDF has constantly communicated with Oracle there has been no response. Oracle might be good at PR and marketing itself but it seems unable to deliver anything. Just my opinion and i wasn't a founder member nor a current member. It seems that you were kindly offering something that TDF would have valued greatly if TDF had been in the position you were told it was in. Since that is quite far from reality it upset people that thought you might have been trying to take over. Perhaps whoever gave you the mis-information from was hoping that exactly this sort of misunderstanding would drive a wedge between Apache and TDF. However, i think both organisations have a great deal to gain from co-operating and that is exactly something that Oracle would dislike. I think your offer was extremely generous and meant kindly. Regards to all from Tom :) -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [steering-discuss] call from CW 15 online
Hi :) If there is some sort of voice recording (perhaps via Voip?) then perhaps some minutes could be generated? I'm not a touch-typist but there are probably people around that could do something or perhaps just place the recording wherre minutes are usually kept? Regards from Tom :) From: Florian Effenberger flo...@documentfoundation.org To: steering-discuss@documentfoundation.org Sent: Mon, 18 April, 2011 20:07:00 Subject: Re: [steering-discuss] call from CW 15 online Hello, Volker Merschmann wrote on 2011-04-18 20.21: I have to remind the members of the steering committee to write down the minutes of their meetings. Not everybody is willing to hear the whole stream for tracking the information, some might even not be able to understand all. well, maybe there will also be some community members dialing in and volunteering to take notes. :-) I see the need for the notes, but especially when you only have two or three people in the call, additionally taking notes is a real burden. Hopefully, participation will be better next times. Florian -- Florian Effenberger flo...@documentfoundation.org Steering Committee and Founding Member of The Document Foundation Tel: +49 8341 99660880 | Mobile: +49 151 14424108 Skype: floeff | Twitter/Identi.ca: @floeff -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [steering-discuss] Reducing donation ads
Hi :) I think the devastation is on such a massive scale it makes the twin towers incident seem tiny, contained and inconsequential by comparison yet that had repercussions globally. All disasters are, of course, horrendous but the scale of this is unprecedented. The Japanese people have given us some great technological advances and a higher level of production and productivity than we would have had otherwise. I think it is time the rest of the world took the opportunity to repay some of that debt. I don't think that switching our fund-raising from TDF to the Japanese people would set a precedent for supporting any and every relatively minor disaster from now on. At least i hope we never see anything of this scale again. Regards from Tom :) From: Kazunari Hirano khir...@gmail.com To: steering-discuss@documentfoundation.org Sent: Thu, 17 March, 2011 20:04:44 Subject: Re: [steering-discuss] Reducing donation ads Hi all, Thanks for your consideration. Your words on the TDF lists are really encouraging. Since I live in Ichinoseki next to Rikuzentakada and Ofunato, the coast area devastated by the tsunami, I will do my best to help and support people who are evacuated from the area. We Japanese, from the bottom of our heart, appreciate your help and supports form abroad. If you take a look at some articles in my blog http://openoffice.exblog.jp/ you will see the grave situation. Thanks, khirano On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 10:00 PM, Andre Schnabel andre.schna...@gmx.net wrote: Hi, Von: Florian Effenberger flo...@documentfoundation.org two hearts are beating in my breast here -- on the one hand, sure, we cannot do that much. On the other hand, it's a question of grace to freeze our fundraising for a few days, to show there are more important things at the moment... but I am undetermined. I'd like to second Olivier Cleynen's mail - there will *always* be things that are more important than TDF fundraising. No matter how important we feel TDF is - it is only just a very little piece in what is important for mankind at any given time. But - it actually is the piece we decided to take care about. So - really, my thoughts and wishes are with all the people in Japan, I owe highest respect to all those people who are currently going to Japan to help there - I hope, all these helping people will be successfull and get the situation under control very soon and will be able to save lives. But these are my private thoughts - and as the person that I am I'd encourage everyone to see if there is something she could do to help to ease many of the problems (currently in Japan, but there are many more problems). Anyway - TDF should continue to take care about TDF's mission. regards, André -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity *** -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity *** -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [steering-discuss] SC Vote on first members of TDF
I'm not a voting member but it all looks good to me, apart from being inquorate and these glitches are unavoidable sometimes. Many thanks to all of you for an excellent first release and an amazing job in setting up community systems so quickly! Congrats, thanks and regards from Tom :) From: Charles-H. Schulz charles.sch...@documentfoundation.org To: steering-discuss@documentfoundation.org Cc: Michael Meeks michael.me...@novell.com; Thorsten Behrens tbehr...@novell.com; Caolán McNamara caol...@redhat.com; André Schnabel andre.schna...@gmx.net; gautier.sophie gautier.sop...@gmail.com; flo...@documentfoundation.org; Olivier Hallot dir...@broffice.org; Italo Vignoli italo.vign...@gmail.com; Claudio F Filho filh...@gmail.com; Leif Lodahl l...@magenta-aps.dk; Davide Dozza dav...@flossconsulting.it; Cor Nouws c...@nouenoff.nl; Christoph Noack christ...@dogmatux.com Sent: Fri, 28 January, 2011 15:51:36 Subject: [steering-discuss] SC Vote on first members of TDF *** Steering Committee Members their deputies only *** As we haven't reached a quorum last night we need to decide for practical reasons on two specific questions. These questions relate to the formation of the Membership Committee. By decision of the SC we have appointed André Schnabel, Sophie Gautier and Fridrich Strba as the three members of this Membership Council. But we need to regularly jumpstart the committee and the membership formation process. We should thus vote on two specific points of order: 1) approve that people listed at http://www.documentfoundation.org/foundation/ are current members of TDF according to our ByLaws 2) approve Fridrich Strba as member of TDF We are going to vote here on this list and the vote will be open for the next 24 hours. Two simple rules: - vote yes or no for each question, by sending your mail to this list with 1) yes/no 2) yes/no - deputies can vote if their corresponding SC member is not available. Best, -- Charles-H. Schulz Membre du Comité exécutif The Document Foundation. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity *** -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
[steering-discuss] development releases
Hi I think Oracle have decided they are competing with LibreOffice but so far we seem to be co-operating with them. It would be wise for us to 1. Beat them to the finish line. 2. Keep aware of what they are doing, odd stats can help sometimes 3. Keep going the way we have been, rapid growth and development in infra-structure and support along with excellent coding development 4. Keep co-operating as long as they let us. After initial release we wil, of course, keep developing in all areas so rushing final release and getting it out there wouldn't hurt us. We don't have to worry about corporate clients right now but they do. So a 2nd release in another couple of months wouldn't hurt us but it's almost unthinkable for them. Regards from Tom :) From: webmas...@krackedpress.com webmas...@krackedpress.com To: us...@libreoffice.org Sent: Sat, 22 January, 2011 13:09:22 Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Add/Remove RTL and LTR buttond to formating toolbar has no effect On 01/22/2011 06:29 AM, Andrea Pescetti wrote: webmaster wrote: OpenOffice.org is on RC10 right now, while LibreO is on RC4. What I have been seeing in these threads lead me to believe that the people are slower to put out a RC version, but also may wait between RC version for more of the work to be done Actually I believe that the 3.3 release process should not be taken as a reference at all, but LibreOffice is definitely not slower, it's faster; it merely started the RC phase later. Here are the relevant RC dates: 2010-11-29 OpenOffice.org RC7 2010-12-05 LibreOffice 3.3.0 RC1 2010-12-17 OpenOffice.org RC8 2010-12-23 LibreOffice 3.3.0 RC2 2011-01-13 LibreOffice 3.3.0 RC3 2011-01-14 OpenOffice.org RC9 2011-01-20 LibreOffice 3.3.0 RC4 2011-01-21 OpenOffice.org RC10 so the average lifespan of a Release Candidate in this period was 18 days for OpenOffice.org and 15 days for LibreOffice. Then I should repeat that the 3.3 release process was definitely not standard on either side, so a comparison like this one will make more sense in future releases. Sources: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Marketing/ReleaseDates http://www.openoffice.org/servlets/SummarizeList?listName=releasesby=date Regards, Andrea. What I wanted to imply, was that to me LibreO people are doing a good job and not rushing a RC out when it is not ready. LibreO RC4 seems better than OOo's RC10. Might be me, but that is my opinion. I have seen show stoppers with OOo's RCs but not one with LibreO so far in its RC2, RC3, RC4. So I have no problem running/using LibreO RC3 or 4 while I rarely will use an OOo RC anymore. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to users+h...@libreoffice.org List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/users/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity *** -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [steering-discuss] paid Doodle account
Preferring to support other OpenSource projects is a good aim but 22 € is easier to pay if that covers all of us and all the lists to get it sorted fast. It does mean continuing to use existing systems that people are now familiar with which is an advantage. Generally i would say we should try to use OpenSource but in this case perhaps we can use the easiest thing and review it in a years time? Regards from Tom :) From: Florian Effenberger flo...@documentfoundation.org To: steering-discuss@documentfoundation.org Sent: Fri, 21 January, 2011 19:27:43 Subject: Re: [steering-discuss] paid Doodle account Hi, Andreas Mantke wrote on 2011-01-21 20.14: I don't think, we should spent the money on this. What did you think about this tool?: http://gpl.univ-avignon.fr/rdvz/ We can host this on our own resource. I think installing it costs more time than 22 € are worth. :-) However, if someone volunteers, I'm happy to wait for it. Florian -- Florian Effenberger flo...@documentfoundation.org Steering Committee and Founding Member of The Document Foundation Tel: +49 8341 99660880 | Mobile: +49 151 14424108 Skype: floeff | Twitter/Identi.ca: @floeff -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity *** -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [steering-discuss] libreoffice.org e-mail accounts
Hi guys ... ladies [ bows ] I think that giving @LibreOffice.Org email addresses out to even non-members would be a good way of getting the name Libre Office out there and visible. People don't assume that Yahoo is represented by people with an @Yahoo.Co.Uk address so could we do something similar? I think making it a requirement to have a disclaimer in the signature is a non-starter because people will find all sorts of problems with that. By having the @LibreOffice.Org email addresses as a bit more exclusive, ie restricting it to members, makes people want it more but decreases the chances of getting our name out there. At this point both options have good bad points but we need to be clear about which we are choosing and what we are losing because of that choice. Regards from Tom :) From: Michael Meeks michael.me...@novell.com To: steering-discuss@documentfoundation.org Sent: Mon, 17 January, 2011 9:40:26 Subject: Re: [steering-discuss] libreoffice.org e-mail accounts Hi guys, On Sun, 2011-01-16 at 12:52 +0100, Charles-H. Schulz wrote: Leave the mail for TDF oficials as @documetnfoundation.org +1, I would even add the following: @libreoffice.org are only available for official contributors and even they have to request it (I don't exactly see the automatic need for, say, a code contributor to have such an address). I would agree; that handing out @libreoffice.org addresses is a reasonable thing to do - for members. Unfortunately, we have no members yet: but the new MC hopefully will solve that problem for us. Clearly membership needs policing to avoid any mis-representation problems, but I think the number of these is very small. Incidentally, as we give developers git commit access, they get an @freedesktop.org re-direction anyway, so ;-) there is some elite club that they join that way. Free advertising is always good, so if we can get a million @libreoffice.org E-mails out, it can only be useful IMHO. ATB, Michael. -- michael.me...@novell.com , Pseudo Engineer, itinerant idiot -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity *** -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [steering-discuss] libreoffice.org e-mail accounts
Hi again :) Clearly a lot of people agree with me about giving the email addresses out to even non-members would do us a lot of good. Regards from Tom :) From: Friedrich Strohmaier damokles4-lis...@bits-fritz.de To: steering-discuss@documentfoundation.org Sent: Sun, 16 January, 2011 19:53:41 Subject: Re: [steering-discuss] libreoffice.org e-mail accounts Hi Charles, *, Who is it, You agree? Charles-H. Schulz schrieb: Le Sat, 15 Jan 2011 21:23:02 +0100, Friedrich Strohmaier damokles4-lis...@bits-fritz.de a écrit : Olivier Hallot schrieb: Em 14-01-2011 16:16, Tom Davies escreveu: OTOH if people use the email address per...@openoffice.org then it gets the name OpenOffice out there and being seen by a lot of people. Free advertising! +1 For some people this is even a matter of pride, like wearing a t-shirt with a well known brand or message. I agree with this. Regarding easy handling: I tend to expect there is more good than bad to be generous with @libreoffice.org Mail adresses to people joining or even beeing in favor of LibreOffice. Similar as, but not equal as of with openoffice.org. As mentioned by Bernhard, there should be a mechanism of revoking it and it should be clear for everyone this can happen in case of missuse. So, nickn...@libreoffice.org + 1 Leave the mail for TDF oficials as @documetnfoundation.org +1, I would even add the following: @libreoffice.org are only available for official contributors and even they have to request it (I don't exactly see the automatic need for, say, a code contributor to have such an address). I've a different view whom beeing part of the community: What's about one passing the (upcoming) DVD to his neighbour plus giving him first support but never appearing in the official contributing system here? Whats about the teacher advocating and promoting LO in his scool or even an excited user advocating the suite in his company? You wouldn't allow him to use a @libreoffice.org alias? You agree the statements of Tom, Olivier and mine one, finally advocating the opposite - did You read it? :o)) No offence :o)) Gruß/regards -- Friedrich Libreoffice-Box http://libreofficebox.org/ LibreOffice and more on CD/DVD images (german version already started) -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity *** -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [steering-discuss] libreoffice.org e-mail accounts
Yes, obviously we can't force people to use any email address! For me the question is how to be attractive enough that people do want to choose to use it. Often just making something exclusive makes people want it more, especially if there is a known kudos behind it. One thing that worries me about making it members-only is what happens to people whose contributions fall away for some legitimate reason? Also the cases of the teacher or local advocate being forced to prove the size of their contribution is likely to reduce the chances of them bothering. That doesn't hinder them much but does hinder LibreOffice getting it's name out there. Regards from Tom :) From: Charles-H. Schulz charles.sch...@documentfoundation.org To: steering-discuss@documentfoundation.org Sent: Mon, 17 January, 2011 10:30:31 Subject: Re: [steering-discuss] libreoffice.org e-mail accounts Hello Friedrich, 2011/1/16 Friedrich Strohmaier damokles4-lis...@bits-fritz.de Hi Charles, *, Who is it, You agree? Charles-H. Schulz schrieb: Le Sat, 15 Jan 2011 21:23:02 +0100, Friedrich Strohmaier damokles4-lis...@bits-fritz.de a écrit : Olivier Hallot schrieb: Em 14-01-2011 16:16, Tom Davies escreveu: OTOH if people use the email address per...@openoffice.org then it gets the name OpenOffice out there and being seen by a lot of people. Free advertising! +1 For some people this is even a matter of pride, like wearing a t-shirt with a well known brand or message. I agree with this. Regarding easy handling: I tend to expect there is more good than bad to be generous with @libreoffice.org Mail adresses to people joining or even beeing in favor of LibreOffice. Similar as, but not equal as of with openoffice.org. As mentioned by Bernhard, there should be a mechanism of revoking it and it should be clear for everyone this can happen in case of missuse. So, nickn...@libreoffice.org + 1 Leave the mail for TDF oficials as @documetnfoundation.org +1, I would even add the following: @libreoffice.org are only available for official contributors and even they have to request it (I don't exactly see the automatic need for, say, a code contributor to have such an address). I've a different view whom beeing part of the community: What's about one passing the (upcoming) DVD to his neighbour plus giving him first support but never appearing in the official contributing system here? Whats about the teacher advocating and promoting LO in his scool or even an excited user advocating the suite in his company? You wouldn't allow him to use a @libreoffice.org alias? Well, there are many ways you can define a community. What we do here is define a threshold, a level of commitment which marks a point where we have individuals who are committed enough to contribute in a seizable way. I'm well aware there is a community of users, and even a community of fans, but in my view they can benefit in different ways. Also note that there isn't a rule that says users or fans should be hindered to participate. In contrary, Membership is something you earn by contributing in a constant and seizable way (see the Bylaws). But I would like to give you an example, which is in fact a personal one. I regularly use Claws Mail, an email client for reading and sending almost all my mails. I am quite happy with it, so happy in fact, that I'm an advocate of this email client. I wrote two articles about it, I filed a bug report once, chatted on the project's IRC... But I'm not requesting a @claws-mail.orgemail address, and in fact, I don't know of any FOSS project out there that hands out email addresses for fans (aside something indirect such as xyzprojectcommunity.org). So to me there are also advocates and promoters who are very happy without an email address or a special status. You agree the statements of Tom, Olivier and mine one, finally advocating the opposite - did You read it? :o)) Apparently I just read yours :-) Cheers, Charles. No offence :o)) Gruß/regards -- Friedrich Libreoffice-Box http://libreofficebox.org/ LibreOffice and more on CD/DVD images (german version already started) -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.orgsteering-discuss%2bh...@documentfoundation.org List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity *** -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity *** -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [steering-discuss] libreoffice.org e-mail accounts
Ahh, excellent. A useful link there :) Looks like good work too :) Wolvix also doesn't hand out email addresses to people but Ubuntu does. Yahoo became quite well know despite doing little else except handing out email addresses and grew from there. Refusing to use 1 particular way of getting our name out there does not mean total failure but if we always choose to have the least possible impact from the greatest possible work then we are unlikely to get as far as Mozilla. Being aware of possibilities for maximising results while minimising the effort required to get the results might help us get good results. Regards from Tom :) From: Charles-H. Schulz charles.sch...@documentfoundation.org To: steering-discuss@documentfoundation.org Sent: Mon, 17 January, 2011 11:04:00 Subject: Re: [steering-discuss] libreoffice.org e-mail accounts Hello Tom, 2011/1/17 Tom Davies tomdavie...@yahoo.co.uk Yes, obviously we can't force people to use any email address! For me the question is how to be attractive enough that people do want to choose to use it. Often just making something exclusive makes people want it more, especially if there is a known kudos behind it. One thing that worries me about making it members-only is what happens to people whose contributions fall away for some legitimate reason? See this section of our bylaws: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/CommunityBylaws#Membership Also the cases of the teacher or local advocate being forced to prove the size of their contribution is likely to reduce the chances of them bothering. That doesn't hinder them much but does hinder LibreOffice getting it's name out there. Well I don't think so. Frankly if Mozilla had to give out email addresses to anyone in order to spread firefox, I think we would have known it. :-) Best, Charles. Regards from Tom :) From: Charles-H. Schulz charles.sch...@documentfoundation.org To: steering-discuss@documentfoundation.org Sent: Mon, 17 January, 2011 10:30:31 Subject: Re: [steering-discuss] libreoffice.org e-mail accounts Hello Friedrich, 2011/1/16 Friedrich Strohmaier damokles4-lis...@bits-fritz.de Hi Charles, *, Who is it, You agree? Charles-H. Schulz schrieb: Le Sat, 15 Jan 2011 21:23:02 +0100, Friedrich Strohmaier damokles4-lis...@bits-fritz.de a écrit : Olivier Hallot schrieb: Em 14-01-2011 16:16, Tom Davies escreveu: OTOH if people use the email address per...@openoffice.org then it gets the name OpenOffice out there and being seen by a lot of people. Free advertising! +1 For some people this is even a matter of pride, like wearing a t-shirt with a well known brand or message. I agree with this. Regarding easy handling: I tend to expect there is more good than bad to be generous with @libreoffice.org Mail adresses to people joining or even beeing in favor of LibreOffice. Similar as, but not equal as of with openoffice.org. As mentioned by Bernhard, there should be a mechanism of revoking it and it should be clear for everyone this can happen in case of missuse. So, nickn...@libreoffice.org + 1 Leave the mail for TDF oficials as @documetnfoundation.org +1, I would even add the following: @libreoffice.org are only available for official contributors and even they have to request it (I don't exactly see the automatic need for, say, a code contributor to have such an address). I've a different view whom beeing part of the community: What's about one passing the (upcoming) DVD to his neighbour plus giving him first support but never appearing in the official contributing system here? Whats about the teacher advocating and promoting LO in his scool or even an excited user advocating the suite in his company? You wouldn't allow him to use a @libreoffice.org alias? Well, there are many ways you can define a community. What we do here is define a threshold, a level of commitment which marks a point where we have individuals who are committed enough to contribute in a seizable way. I'm well aware there is a community of users, and even a community of fans, but in my view they can benefit in different ways. Also note that there isn't a rule that says users or fans should be hindered to participate. In contrary, Membership is something you earn by contributing in a constant and seizable way (see the Bylaws). But I would like to give you an example, which is in fact a personal one. I regularly use Claws Mail, an email client for reading and sending almost all my mails. I am quite happy with it, so happy in fact, that I'm an advocate of this email client. I wrote two articles about it, I filed a bug report once, chatted on the project's IRC... But I'm not requesting a @claws-mail.orgemail address, and in fact, I don't know of any FOSS project out
Re: [steering-discuss] Minutes of SC call 2011-01-13 for review
Brilliant :)) A good answer to cover all the concerns raised. A small team with input from different mailing-list groups. General discussion about that website and all the 'local' ones can be kept to the website mailing-list with any luck. Perhaps an occasional report to SC would be the icing on the cake but given that 'some' steering group members are on the website list and some website team are on the SC i think this would be best done informally. Regards from Tom :) From: Stefan Weigel stefan.wei...@bildungskreis.org To: steering-discuss@documentfoundation.org Sent: Fri, 14 January, 2011 20:34:19 Subject: Re: [steering-discuss] Minutes of SC call 2011-01-13 for review Hi SC, Am 14.01.2011 16:20, schrieb Andre Schnabel: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/TDF/Steering_Committee_Meetings#Minutes_2011-01-13 3 quote # decision: SC appoints a team of 4 people that will be responsible for managing the website for a trial period of two months this team consists of: * David Nelson (for textual content) * Christoph Noack (for user experience) * Ivan Miskovic (for design) * Christian Lohmaier (for infrastructure) /qoute Is this for the international (main) site only? Are we still allowed to use our roles as authors and publishers in Silverstripe, as we have done the past weeks? Stefan -- LibreOffice - Die Freiheit nehm' ich mir! -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity *** -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [steering-discuss] libreoffice.org e-mail accounts
Brilliant! I definitely like the sound of that as it solves all the issues there. Good thinking :) Can we do this? Regards from Tom :) From: Olivier Hallot olivier.hal...@documentfoundation.org To: steering-discuss@documentfoundation.org Sent: Fri, 14 January, 2011 19:21:10 Subject: Re: [steering-discuss] libreoffice.org e-mail accounts Em 14-01-2011 16:16, Tom Davies escreveu: OTOH if people use the email address per...@openoffice.org then it gets the name OpenOffice out there and being seen by a lot of people. Free advertising! +1 For some people this is even a matter of pride, like wearing a t-shirt with a well known brand or message. So, nickn...@libreoffice.org Leave the mail for TDF oficials as @documetnfoundation.org Regards -- Olivier Hallot Comitê Executivo The Document Foundation Voicing the enterprise needs -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity *** -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [steering-discuss] contacting LibO and TDF domain holders
Hi :) I think it does need doing at some point if you are happy doing it then that is fantastic :) Regards from Tom :) From: Florian Effenberger flo...@documentfoundation.org To: steering-discuss@documentfoundation.org Sent: Mon, 27 December, 2010 16:15:05 Subject: [steering-discuss] contacting LibO and TDF domain holders Hello, I am thinking about contacting LibO and TDF domain holders that we are not yet aware of. Lots of people registered domain names and connected them to our DNS servers, and informed us, but some also didn't. Most of these are friendly (i.e. pointing the domain to their mirror or the like), and I really hate legal letters, so my take would be to send them a short notice that we right now have started the LibO website, and would be delighted to connect these domains to our DNS, so they point to the right site, or even transfer them to us. Even if someone refuses that, as long as the site is a friendly one, it can stay where it is -- I would only take action on fraud sites. What do you think? Florian -- Florian Effenberger flo...@documentfoundation.org Steering Committee and Founding Member of The Document Foundation Tel: +49 8341 99660880 | Mobile: +49 151 14424108 Skype: floeff | Twitter/Identi.ca: @floeff -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity *** -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: RE : Re: [steering-discuss] Re: [libreoffice-website] Website status
Hi We are still getting a lot of traffic in here about the website and i really think we need to avoid every group micro-managing every other group. People can easily join 2 or more lists to stay updated on different groups. David quite properly sent the email he was referring to to the website mailing list. However once the website change was completed the announcement to the steering group was spot-on and good to see. Happy christmas all btw ;) Regards from Tom :) From: Charles-H. Schulz charles.sch...@documentfoundation.org To: steering-discuss@documentfoundation.org Sent: Fri, 24 December, 2010 21:54:47 Subject: RE : Re: [steering-discuss] Re: [libreoffice-website] Website status David, can you please resend that email you were referring to? Charles. Le 24 déc. 2010, 8:11 AM, David Nelson comme...@traduction.biz a écrit : Hi Italo, all, :-) I'm very happy to see the site launched. A really big thanks to Christian for making that happen. :-) It currently looks like I might get a go-ahead to work on a really great new theme for the site with Nikash Singh, to be ready by the early days of the New Year... So there's still more work to do, but the site could look really Web 2.0 and good. I'm waiting for a response about that from Florian, Christoph and Charles in a mail that's awaiting their urgent attention in their mailboxes. ;-) Italo, as a key player in marketing, I created an account for you on the site. I mailed you your password, etc. I can tutor you online concerning working on content, if you like, via Skype. Just buzz me if you want that. Until then, you *might* like to submit me any content you want published, until such time as the SC takes decisions about editorial organization, etc. David Nelson -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.orgsteering-discuss%2bh...@documentfoundation.orgList archive: ... -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity *** -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [steering-discuss] Re: [libreoffice-website] Website status
Hi :) I like the way the website is at the moment. I also quite like the proposed screenshot except that i would prefer the download button on the left so that people can access it without having to scroll sideways. Ok, it may not be perfect for everyone but what we have got works well. It might be a good time to stand back from the website and look at what we have while we push forwards in other strategic areas. Perfection is a great goal but we need to get basics in place first and we seem to already have more than that with the website. It is pleasant, informative, uncluttered and fast. It is easy to reach the download buttons. Do we really need it more perfect than it is already? I think congratulations are due to everyone involved and it is great that we have ideas building up and being finalised but i am not sure we have to action them hastily? Anarchy? My background is mostly in co-operative organisations http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mondragon_Corporation http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cooperative but i agree that getting work done can be more important than discussions as long as there is room to make changes or revert to previous versions after-the-fact. I don't see this as a contradiction but many people new to co-operatives or other non-hierarchical structures often assume that discussion about every tiny point is vital. It isn't. Getting the job done is usually far more important. The wider group may set policy or determine house/company style based on early experimentation. Anyone 'should' be free to express an opinion and stupid questions may reveal a possibility for useful innovation but the people doing the work have to be free to get on with the work. Ideas and suggestions are good if they help get the work done but if they are not immediately useful they 'should' be ignored or allowed to grow into something more useful later. Anyone 'should' be free to do sundry jobs under the direction of the main worker(s) as though being mentored for a while if that helps get the work done. It sometimes helps to split into 'temporary' roles such as one person/group working mainly on content and the other mainly on look-and-feel, each able to make suggestions to the other team/person. Note that 4/5 (80%) of new businesses FAIL in the first 2 years when they are set up in a traditional hierarchical format with 1 top boss dictating and no-one else feeling like they have any ownership of the project. By contrast only 2/5 (40%) of new worker co-operatives fail in the first 2 years. Innovation is crucial and we seldom get that from 1 single leader. The trick is getting people empowered, perhaps helping finding/developing their best area, so they can work on the projects too. I don't really think we need to discuss this now and it might be disruptive to do so. It is worth considering that we need a more fluid dynamic here than most people are used to in the outside world. I hope this helps otherwise just ignore it! Good luck and regards from Tom :) From: David Nelson comme...@traduction.biz To: steering-discuss@documentfoundation.org Sent: Wed, 22 December, 2010 0:54:11 Subject: [steering-discuss] Re: [libreoffice-website] Website status Hi, :-) On Wed, Dec 22, 2010 at 07:39, Bernhard Dippold bernh...@familie-dippold.at wrote: Hi David, all, once again, please don't think I would not appreciate your great work, even if I try to improve the look and feel of the welcome page. snip Please have a look at Christoph's proposal: http://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/bbnG0Hny0SpccJIZsGp72A?feat=directlink I must admit that, personally, I don't find this layout attractive at all, although it gives some general indicators about content positioning. I'm sorry, that I can't design a mockup at the moment. Time is short even for adding the short phases... I *have* read your ideas, and will carefully read them and think about them again as I finish off this first version of the site content. I am doing my best to take account of your comments and the comments of other people in what I'm doing. But, sometimes, the proposals and reactions are so sharply contrasting that it is difficult or impossible to please everybody. The problem is that it is *extremely* difficult to work in the current situation: it's a kind of contributive anarchy, with no-one having a clearly-appointed lead role in particular areas of the project. Thus, the only conclusion you can arrive at is this: the people that actually *do* work are the ones that get to call the shots. If they are good community members, they will do their best to take account of other people's opinions. But, in many cases, one has to take a decision, and the decision will inevitably dissatisfy someone. Such is the case in what I'm presently doing. I observed how, after long discussions on the mailing lists and various conference calls, the website team