subject:"Time for the ASF to send an Open Letter\?"


On 17 Dec 2011, at 01:29, Ross Gardler wrote:

 On 15 November 2011 22:47, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote:
 
 http://www.robweir.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/oo-forks.png
 
 Rob. I might need to reuse this, can I assume it is OK to do so. I
 don't plan to edit it in any way, just rename it to oo-derivatives
 (or similar) and move to an apache.org address.

Did you also see Michael Meeks' attempt to visualise this context?  
  http://people.gnome.org/~michael/blog/2011-11-18-graphs.html

While it's also flawed, it has a number of advantages over Rob's graph in 
helping people understand the current state of the community and the extent of 
its diversity.

S.

Re: Time for the ASF to send an Open Letter?

2011-12-17 Thread Rob Weir

On Sat, Dec 17, 2011 at 9:40 AM, Simon Phipps si...@webmink.com wrote:

 On 17 Dec 2011, at 01:29, Ross Gardler wrote:

 On 15 November 2011 22:47, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote:

 http://www.robweir.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/oo-forks.png

 Rob. I might need to reuse this, can I assume it is OK to do so. I
 don't plan to edit it in any way, just rename it to oo-derivatives
 (or similar) and move to an apache.org address.

 Did you also see Michael Meeks' attempt to visualise this context?
  http://people.gnome.org/~michael/blog/2011-11-18-graphs.html

 While it's also flawed, it has a number of advantages over Rob's graph in 
 helping people understand the current state of the community and the extent 
 of its diversity.


What that chart fails to show is the family tree.  it suggests that
LibreOffice is something different than OpenOffice.org rather than 90%
the same, derived from OpenOffice.  It fails to show that there always
has always been an ecosystem of projects derived from OOo code.

The fact is every user of LO is also a user of OOo code.  It is part
of that ecosystem.  Not just the past, but also the future.  For
example, I see that Michael is looking forward to using (cherry
picking) our recent improvements in SVG support:

http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice/2011-December/021884.html

This is wonderful.

-Rob

 S.

Re: Time for the ASF to send an Open Letter?

Thanks Simon, unfortunately the representation here, indicating the date of
the last release as the end of the line (literally) is not really the
message I'm after.

Sent from my mobile device, please forgive errors and brevity.
On Dec 17, 2011 2:40 PM, Simon Phipps si...@webmink.com wrote:


 On 17 Dec 2011, at 01:29, Ross Gardler wrote:

  On 15 November 2011 22:47, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote:
 
  http://www.robweir.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/oo-forks.png
 
  Rob. I might need to reuse this, can I assume it is OK to do so. I
  don't plan to edit it in any way, just rename it to oo-derivatives
  (or similar) and move to an apache.org address.

 Did you also see Michael Meeks' attempt to visualise this context?
  http://people.gnome.org/~michael/blog/2011-11-18-graphs.html

 While it's also flawed, it has a number of advantages over Rob's graph in
 helping people understand the current state of the community and the extent
 of its diversity.

 S.

Re: Time for the ASF to send an Open Letter?

Surely that's just a matter of fact, though? When AOO makes a new release,
it will be a different codebase under a different brand, so on both charts
would show as a new block. Michael's has the advantage that it shows the
relative adoption of the various lines, something that Rob's (by including
every possible variant regardless of relevance) tends to hide.

S.
 On Dec 17, 2011 2:53 PM, Ross Gardler rgard...@opendirective.com wrote:

 Thanks Simon, unfortunately the representation here, indicating the date of
 the last release as the end of the line (literally) is not really the
 message I'm after.

 Sent from my mobile device, please forgive errors and brevity.
 On Dec 17, 2011 2:40 PM, Simon Phipps si...@webmink.com wrote:

 
  On 17 Dec 2011, at 01:29, Ross Gardler wrote:
 
   On 15 November 2011 22:47, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote:
  
   http://www.robweir.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/oo-forks.png
  
   Rob. I might need to reuse this, can I assume it is OK to do so. I
   don't plan to edit it in any way, just rename it to oo-derivatives
   (or similar) and move to an apache.org address.
 
  Did you also see Michael Meeks' attempt to visualise this context?
   http://people.gnome.org/~michael/blog/2011-11-18-graphs.html
 
  While it's also flawed, it has a number of advantages over Rob's graph in
  helping people understand the current state of the community and the
 extent
  of its diversity.
 
  S.

Re: Time for the ASF to send an Open Letter?

On 17 December 2011 15:44, Simon Phipps si...@webmink.com wrote:
 Michael's has the advantage that it shows the
 relative adoption of the various lines, something that Rob's (by including
 every possible variant regardless of relevance) tends to hide.

It's not the relative adoption I want to show. If I did want that then
Michaels would indeed be a better document).

Ross



 S.
  On Dec 17, 2011 2:53 PM, Ross Gardler rgard...@opendirective.com wrote:

 Thanks Simon, unfortunately the representation here, indicating the date of
 the last release as the end of the line (literally) is not really the
 message I'm after.

 Sent from my mobile device, please forgive errors and brevity.
 On Dec 17, 2011 2:40 PM, Simon Phipps si...@webmink.com wrote:

 
  On 17 Dec 2011, at 01:29, Ross Gardler wrote:
 
   On 15 November 2011 22:47, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote:
  
   http://www.robweir.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/oo-forks.png
  
   Rob. I might need to reuse this, can I assume it is OK to do so. I
   don't plan to edit it in any way, just rename it to oo-derivatives
   (or similar) and move to an apache.org address.
 
  Did you also see Michael Meeks' attempt to visualise this context?
   http://people.gnome.org/~michael/blog/2011-11-18-graphs.html
 
  While it's also flawed, it has a number of advantages over Rob's graph in
  helping people understand the current state of the community and the
 extent
  of its diversity.
 
  S.
 
 
 




-- 
Ross Gardler (@rgardler)
Programme Leader (Open Development)
OpenDirective http://opendirective.com

Re: Time for the ASF to send an Open Letter?

On Dec 17, 2011 4:13 PM, Ross Gardler rgard...@opendirective.com wrote:

 It's not the relative adoption I want to show. If I did want that then
 Michaels would indeed be a better document).

What do you want to show? Maybe one of us can help by coming up with a
suitable graphical representation that shows it without misrepresenting
other facts?

S.

Re: Time for the ASF to send an Open Letter?

Sent from my mobile device, please forgive errors and brevity.
On Dec 17, 2011 5:09 PM, Simon Phipps si...@webmink.com wrote:

 On Dec 17, 2011 4:13 PM, Ross Gardler rgard...@opendirective.com
wrote:
 
  It's not the relative adoption I want to show. If I did want that then
  Michaels would indeed be a better document).

 What do you want to show? Maybe one of us can help by coming up with a
 suitable graphical representation that shows it without misrepresenting
 other facts?

I'm looking for something that shows diversity in the open document format
ecosystem.

I don't want to get into marking territory, comparing size, arguing over
who is better or more active or inactive or whatever. I want facts, nothing
more. Just an alphabetised list of all projects that consume and/or produce
ODF would be ideal.

Anything along those lines would be very much appreciated.

Ross

RE: Time for the ASF to send an Open Letter?

2011-12-17 Thread Dennis E. Hamilton

Does that include converters and commercial offerings that have embedded 
support for ODF consumption and production?  (I suppose if Symphony is in that 
diagram, the answer is yes at least for embedded support.)

 - Dennis

-Original Message-
From: Ross Gardler [mailto:rgard...@opendirective.com] 
Sent: Saturday, December 17, 2011 09:25
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: Time for the ASF to send an Open Letter?

[ ... ]

I don't want to get into marking territory, comparing size, arguing over
who is better or more active or inactive or whatever. I want facts, nothing
more. Just an alphabetised list of all projects that consume and/or produce
ODF would be ideal.

Anything along those lines would be very much appreciated.

Ross

Re: Time for the ASF to send an Open Letter?

On Dec 17, 2011 5:25 PM, Ross Gardler rgard...@opendirective.com wrote:

 I'm looking for something that shows diversity in the open document format
 ecosystem.

Ah, OK. Rob's chart is unsuitable for that, as he only shows projects that
have rebranded or reused OpenOffice.org at some time in history. There are
a number of other significant packages supporting ODF broadly, notably
Abiword and MS Office. The best list I know is at:
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ODF#Software

As Dennis hints, it's a tricky question as the degree of support (extent of
vocabulary recognised, extent of implementation etc) and scope of the tool
(applications supported, read-only or read/write, and so on) both vary. The
full ecosystem if you include viewers, convertors and so in is quite
extensive. You sound like you just want editors; let me know if the
Wikipedia list helps for your purpose.

S.

Re: Time for the ASF to send an Open Letter?

On 17 December 2011 19:25, Dennis E. Hamilton dennis.hamil...@acm.org wrote:
 Does that include converters and commercial offerings that have embedded 
 support for ODF consumption and production?  (I suppose if Symphony is in 
 that diagram, the answer is yes at least for embedded support.)


Yes, although I realise a request for an itemisation of *everything*
is probably unrealistic. What I want is something that gives an idea
of the reach of ODF and therefore the potential sphere of influence
that Apache OpenOffice code, under a permissive license, might have.

Ross


  - Dennis

 -Original Message-
 From: Ross Gardler [mailto:rgard...@opendirective.com]
 Sent: Saturday, December 17, 2011 09:25
 To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
 Subject: Re: Time for the ASF to send an Open Letter?

 [ ... ]

 I don't want to get into marking territory, comparing size, arguing over
 who is better or more active or inactive or whatever. I want facts, nothing
 more. Just an alphabetised list of all projects that consume and/or produce
 ODF would be ideal.

 Anything along those lines would be very much appreciated.

 Ross




-- 
Ross Gardler (@rgardler)
Programme Leader (Open Development)
OpenDirective http://opendirective.com

Re: Time for the ASF to send an Open Letter?

On 17 December 2011 19:50, Simon Phipps si...@webmink.com wrote:
 On Dec 17, 2011 5:25 PM, Ross Gardler rgard...@opendirective.com wrote:

 I'm looking for something that shows diversity in the open document format
 ecosystem.

 Ah, OK. Rob's chart is unsuitable for that, as he only shows projects that
 have rebranded or reused OpenOffice.org at some time in history.

Yes, that is true. I admit I jumped at your tentative offer of help
and expanded the remit ;-)

There are
 a number of other significant packages supporting ODF broadly, notably
 Abiword and MS Office. The best list I know is at:
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ODF#Software

Damn, I never even thought of looking there! It's even impartial - thank you!

 You sound like you just want editors; let me know if the
 Wikipedia list helps for your purpose.

It certainly does and if anyone feels that they can improve that list,
go for it. We'll let the Wikipedia editorial process deal with the
impartiality thing.

Ross


-- 
Ross Gardler (@rgardler)
Programme Leader (Open Development)
OpenDirective http://opendirective.com

Re: Time for the ASF to send an Open Letter?

2011-12-17 Thread Rob Weir

On Sat, Dec 17, 2011 at 3:42 PM, Ross Gardler
rgard...@opendirective.com wrote:
 On 17 December 2011 19:25, Dennis E. Hamilton dennis.hamil...@acm.org wrote:
 Does that include converters and commercial offerings that have embedded 
 support for ODF consumption and production?  (I suppose if Symphony is in 
 that diagram, the answer is yes at least for embedded support.)


 Yes, although I realise a request for an itemisation of *everything*
 is probably unrealistic. What I want is something that gives an idea
 of the reach of ODF and therefore the potential sphere of influence
 that Apache OpenOffice code, under a permissive license, might have.


The Wikipedia article is a good source of ODF-supporting applications
and tools.  But we should avoid  stereotyping OpenOffice as being only
an ODF editor.  It has broad support for importing and exporting many
other formats, standard as well as well-established proprietary
formats.

In the end there are multiple, overlapping ecosystems, of code, of
standards, etc.

-Rob

 Ross


  - Dennis

 -Original Message-
 From: Ross Gardler [mailto:rgard...@opendirective.com]
 Sent: Saturday, December 17, 2011 09:25
 To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
 Subject: Re: Time for the ASF to send an Open Letter?

 [ ... ]

 I don't want to get into marking territory, comparing size, arguing over
 who is better or more active or inactive or whatever. I want facts, nothing
 more. Just an alphabetised list of all projects that consume and/or produce
 ODF would be ideal.

 Anything along those lines would be very much appreciated.

 Ross




 --
 Ross Gardler (@rgardler)
 Programme Leader (Open Development)
 OpenDirective http://opendirective.com

Re: Time for the ASF to send an Open Letter?

2011-12-17 Thread Michael Meeks

Hi Rob,

On Sat, 2011-12-17 at 09:49 -0500, Rob Weir wrote:
  Did you also see Michael Meeks' attempt to visualise this context?
   http://people.gnome.org/~michael/blog/2011-11-18-graphs.html
...
 What that chart fails to show is the family tree.  it suggests that
 LibreOffice is something different than OpenOffice.org rather than 90%
 the same, derived from OpenOffice.

You know - I would think the title of my blog:

Trying to visualise Open Source OpenOffice.org derivatives

And the title embedded in the graph image:

Recent history of Legacy OpenOffice Ecosystem Derivatives

Made this pretty plain :-) Of course the exact lineage of each build
from each vendor follows a rather tangled path; but no-one is trying to
deny a common ancestor between AOOI and LibreOffice.

   It fails to show that there always has always been an
 ecosystem of projects derived from OOo code.

Sure - my graph is mostly interested in trying to present a more
balanced view of the present, from which hopefully people may have a
better grasp of the future. Yours was (in context) talking about the
legacy tail, and frequent forking of the code-base as your title makes
clear, which is fine too in it's original context. I think extrapolating
from it carries some risk though; and it is sad to have so few
LibreOffice releases rendered.

 The fact is every user of LO is also a user of OOo code.

Sure, and every user of AOOI is also a user of OOo code, many of us
were also very long term contributors to OOo and hence (by extension,
and unwittingly to AOOI) :-)

  It is part of that ecosystem.

cf. the title of my post, and slides :-)

   Not just the past, but also the future.  For example, I see that
 Michael is looking forward to using (cherry picking) our recent
 improvements in SVG support:

Sure - if it is easier for us to include an existing feature, under an
acceptable license into LibreOffice why would we bother re-writing it ?
conversely if it is easier to re-write, why not ?

I don't want anyone to get the idea that LibreOffice will be based on
AOOI, and that this is going to be the rule. The term cherry picking
is used advisedly - if there are cherries worth picking someone -may-
pick them from time to time as/when licensing is squared up on both
sides.

All the best,

Michael.

-- 
michael.me...@suse.com  , Pseudo Engineer, itinerant idiot

Re: Time for the ASF to send an Open Letter?

On 17 December 2011 22:01, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote:
 On Sat, Dec 17, 2011 at 3:42 PM, Ross Gardler
 rgard...@opendirective.com wrote:
 On 17 December 2011 19:25, Dennis E. Hamilton dennis.hamil...@acm.org 
 wrote:
 Does that include converters and commercial offerings that have embedded 
 support for ODF consumption and production?  (I suppose if Symphony is in 
 that diagram, the answer is yes at least for embedded support.)


 Yes, although I realise a request for an itemisation of *everything*
 is probably unrealistic. What I want is something that gives an idea
 of the reach of ODF and therefore the potential sphere of influence
 that Apache OpenOffice code, under a permissive license, might have.


 The Wikipedia article is a good source of ODF-supporting applications
 and tools.  But we should avoid  stereotyping OpenOffice as being only
 an ODF editor.  It has broad support for importing and exporting many
 other formats, standard as well as well-established proprietary
 formats.

Noted - thanks Rob.

Ross

Re: Time for the ASF to send an Open Letter?

Lets not dive into another Us Vs Them argument, its not productive or necessary.

Clearly Robs graphic is not suitable for my purpose, neither is
Michaels. However, Simons suggestion of using the Wikipedia article is
a good one.

Ross

Re: Time for the ASF to send an Open Letter?

2011-12-17 Thread eric b


Hi,

Le 17 déc. 11 à 23:26, Ross Gardler a écrit :

Lets not dive into another Us Vs Them argument, its not productive  
or necessary.

Clearly Robs graphic is not suitable for my purpose,



Well, it is not that bad.



neither is
Michaels. However, Simons suggestion of using the Wikipedia article  
is a good one.



If I was you, I wouldn't be so categorical : the french version  
pretends Apache OpenOffice.org ( http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/ 
OpenOffice.org ) is a fork


We probably should take an eye on the Italian and the German versions.



--
qɔᴉɹə
Projet OOo4Kids : http://wiki.ooo4kids.org/index.php/Main_Page
L'association EducOOo : http://www.educoo.org
Blog : http://eric.bachard.org/news

Re: Time for the ASF to send an Open Letter?

On 17 December 2011 22:50, eric b eric.bach...@free.fr wrote:
 Hi,

 Le 17 déc. 11 à 23:26, Ross Gardler a écrit :


 Lets not dive into another Us Vs Them argument, its not productive or
 necessary.
 Clearly Robs graphic is not suitable for my purpose,



 Well, it is not that bad.

No it is not, it does seem to upset some, but then it's impossible not
to upset someone.

 neither is
 Michaels. However, Simons suggestion of using the Wikipedia article is a
 good one.



 If I was you, I wouldn't be so categorical : the french version pretends
 Apache OpenOffice.org ( http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenOffice.org ) is a
 fork

Hmmm...

Thanks, I'll put some more thought into this.

Ross

Re: Time for the ASF to send an Open Letter?

2011-12-17 Thread Kazunari Hirano

Hi Ross,

It's interesting to browse wikipedia pages named
http://xx.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenOffice.org;
Change xx to your favorite language code, for example, el, which
makes http://el.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenOffice.org;
And you can not find Apache on the el page, can you?

Now try:
http://hi.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenOffice.org
http://ar.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenOffice.org
http://da.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenOffice.org

Can you find Apache on these pages?

That's why we should send an Open Letter with correct information and
update to the world.

Thanks,
khirano
-- 
khir...@apache.org
OpenOffice.org[TM](incubating)|The Free and Open Productivity Suite
Apache incubator
http://incubator.apache.org/openofficeorg/

Re: Time for the ASF to send an Open Letter?

2011-12-17 Thread Pedro Giffuni


--- Sab 17/12/11, Michael Meeks ha scritto:

 
     Sure - if it is easier for us to include
 an existing feature, under an
 acceptable license into LibreOffice why would we bother
 re-writing it ?
 conversely if it is easier to re-write, why not ?
 

And it's usually so much easier to take. Steve jobs
had a famous quote about that that I don't remember
very well ;-).

     I don't want anyone to get the idea that
 LibreOffice will be based on
 AOOI, and that this is going to be the rule.

It's rather interesting that for AOO the OpenOffice.org
legacy is essential. We are different from OOo in the
freedom given by the Apache License but otherwise we
are the continuation of the SUN/Oracle legacy.

LibreOffice instead seems to be more interested in
showing independence from what would seem to have been
the past oppressive Oracle/SUN regime.  Again Steve Jobs
had a good quote for this It's more fun to be a pirate
than to join the navy.

And then all this independence is somewhat fake in that
LibreOffice seems condemned to carry OpenOffice.org
LGPL3 headers unless they get new headers from AOO.

Just thinking out loud :-P.

Pedro.

Re: Time for the ASF to send an Open Letter?

2011-12-16 Thread Ross Gardler

On 15 November 2011 22:47, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote:

 http://www.robweir.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/oo-forks.png

Rob. I might need to reuse this, can I assume it is OK to do so. I
don't plan to edit it in any way, just rename it to oo-derivatives
(or similar) and move to an apache.org address.

Ross

Re: Time for the ASF to send an Open Letter?

2011-12-16 Thread Ross Gardler

On 15 November 2011 18:03, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote:
 On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 12:46 PM, Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com wrote:
 I have been mulling this over for a long time...

 Up to now, we have been reactionary. We have allowed others to
 control and distort the message, paint things as a us vs. them
 battle (simply to position themselves for personal gain in the
 whole debacle), and foster FUD to the clear harm of the ENTIRE
 OOo ecosystem.


 Of course, an AOOo release would be the best possible vehicle for
 expressing a proactive message.  But until we have that, I could
 certainly see the value of having a statement on what we are, what we
 believe, what we stand for, etc.  At graduation time we'd draft a
 charter for the new TLP.  But today we don't have anything.

 I think it's time that an Open Letter to the entire Open Office
 ecosystem (companies, entities, individuals, etc...) be drafted
 that sets the record straight.


 Hmm... maybe we have different things in mind.  I was thinking more of
 a manifesto type statement.  We are the Apache OpenOffice podling.
 These are the things we believe are important... and then list 10
 things and end with, Here's how you can help

 That would be proactive, not reactionary.

This thread got de-railed by the TeamOO revalation that they plan an
OOo 3.3.1 release. However, it is still very important, in fact even
more important.

Any chance of resurrecting this idea and delivering on it as a matter
of some urgency?

Ross

Re: Time for the ASF to send an Open Letter?

2011-12-16 Thread Rob Weir

On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 8:29 PM, Ross Gardler
rgard...@opendirective.com wrote:
 On 15 November 2011 22:47, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote:

 http://www.robweir.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/oo-forks.png

 Rob. I might need to reuse this, can I assume it is OK to do so. I
 don't plan to edit it in any way, just rename it to oo-derivatives
 (or similar) and move to an apache.org address.


Sure.  And let me know if you need any modifications.  I should have
the source file on my hard drive someplace.

-Rob

 Ross

Re: Time for the ASF to send an Open Letter?

2011-12-16 Thread Rob Weir

On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 8:34 PM, Ross Gardler
rgard...@opendirective.com wrote:
 On 15 November 2011 18:03, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote:
 On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 12:46 PM, Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com wrote:
 I have been mulling this over for a long time...

 Up to now, we have been reactionary. We have allowed others to
 control and distort the message, paint things as a us vs. them
 battle (simply to position themselves for personal gain in the
 whole debacle), and foster FUD to the clear harm of the ENTIRE
 OOo ecosystem.


 Of course, an AOOo release would be the best possible vehicle for
 expressing a proactive message.  But until we have that, I could
 certainly see the value of having a statement on what we are, what we
 believe, what we stand for, etc.  At graduation time we'd draft a
 charter for the new TLP.  But today we don't have anything.

 I think it's time that an Open Letter to the entire Open Office
 ecosystem (companies, entities, individuals, etc...) be drafted
 that sets the record straight.


 Hmm... maybe we have different things in mind.  I was thinking more of
 a manifesto type statement.  We are the Apache OpenOffice podling.
 These are the things we believe are important... and then list 10
 things and end with, Here's how you can help

 That would be proactive, not reactionary.

 This thread got de-railed by the TeamOO revalation that they plan an
 OOo 3.3.1 release. However, it is still very important, in fact even
 more important.

 Any chance of resurrecting this idea and delivering on it as a matter
 of some urgency?


I did start a wiki page on this back at the time, with some quaint ideas:

https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/What+we+believe

If anyone else wants to take a shot, they are welcome.

-Rob

 Ross

Re: Time for the ASF to send an Open Letter?

Hi Rob,

On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 5:55 AM, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote:
 I have no idea.  But my impression was that Oracle was not withholding
 any relevant trademarks or domain names from us.

Thanks.  We will get concrete answers later some day I hope :)

Thanks,
khirano

Re: Time for the ASF to send an Open Letter?

Hi Jim,

On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 2:46 AM, Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com wrote:
 I think it's time that an Open Letter to the entire Open Office
 ecosystem (companies, entities, individuals, etc...) be drafted
 that sets the record straight.

 And I volunteer to drive this task...

When you draft Open Letter to the entire OpenOffice.org ecosystem
including OpenOffice.org 3.3.0 users, please include simple and clear
messages for the world users.
Like
- OpenOffice.org project is now Apache OpenOffice.org (incubating).
- Apache OpenOffice project will develop and release Apache OpenOffice.
- The ASF will keep holding OpenOffice.org trademark.

Thanks,
khirano

Re: Time for the ASF to send an Open Letter?

2011-11-28 Thread Ross Gardler

Sent from my mobile device, please forgive errors and brevity.
On Nov 28, 2011 8:05 AM, Kazunari Hirano khir...@gmail.com wrote:

 Hi Rob,

 On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 5:55 AM, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote:
  I have no idea.  But my impression was that Oracle was not withholding
  any relevant trademarks or domain names from us.

 Thanks.  We will get concrete answers later some day I hope :)

A question to tradema...@apache.org will yield an answer quickly if anyone
needs to know.

Ross


 Thanks,
 khirano

Re: Time for the ASF to send an Open Letter?

Hi Ross,

On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 5:42 PM, Ross Gardler
rgard...@opendirective.com wrote:
 A question to tradema...@apache.org will yield an answer quickly if anyone
 needs to know.

Thanks.  I will subscribe tradema...@apache.org and post my question.
http://sites.google.com/site/khirano/-magokoro-project
I and my project are planning to create OpenOffice.org 3.3.0 CD and
design CD label in cooperation with Japan Open Source Software
Promotion Forum.
http://openoffice.exblog.jp/13617785/
I am wondering what I should do with OpenOffice.org trademark.
http://ooo-site.apache.org/images/ooo-logo.png
Can I use this on the CD label?
http://incubator.apache.org/openofficeorg/images/apache-incubator-logo.png
Should I put this on the CD label?

I will ask tradema...@apache.org
:)

Thanks,
khirano

Re: Time for the ASF to send an Open Letter?

2011-11-28 Thread Rob Weir

On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 3:57 AM, Kazunari Hirano khir...@gmail.com wrote:
 Hi Ross,

 On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 5:42 PM, Ross Gardler
 rgard...@opendirective.com wrote:
 A question to tradema...@apache.org will yield an answer quickly if anyone
 needs to know.

 Thanks.  I will subscribe tradema...@apache.org and post my question.
 http://sites.google.com/site/khirano/-magokoro-project
 I and my project are planning to create OpenOffice.org 3.3.0 CD and
 design CD label in cooperation with Japan Open Source Software
 Promotion Forum.
 http://openoffice.exblog.jp/13617785/
 I am wondering what I should do with OpenOffice.org trademark.
 http://ooo-site.apache.org/images/ooo-logo.png
 Can I use this on the CD label?
 http://incubator.apache.org/openofficeorg/images/apache-incubator-logo.png
 Should I put this on the CD label?


If you are looking for permission to use the trademarks, then you
should follow the instructions here:

http://incubator.apache.org/openofficeorg/trademarks.html

The PPMC approves first, and then sends to Trademarks@

-Rob


 I will ask tradema...@apache.org
 :)

 Thanks,
 khirano

Re: Time for the ASF to send an Open Letter?

Hi Rob,

Thanks.

On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 9:21 PM, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote:
 If you are looking for permission to use the trademarks, then you
 should follow the instructions here:

 http://incubator.apache.org/openofficeorg/trademarks.html

 The PPMC approves first, and then sends to Trademarks@

OK. I will follow those steps.

Thanks,
khirano

Re: Time for the ASF to send an Open Letter?

2011-11-27 Thread Rob Weir

2011/11/26 Kazunari Hirano khir...@gmail.com:
 Hi Rob,

 Thanks.

 On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 9:44 PM, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote:
 Maybe think of it this way;  Kentucky Fried Chicken decided to rebrand
 itself as KFC because the wanted to deemphasize the fried part,
 for modern health-conscious consumers.  But that doesn't meant that
 anyone can go out and open a store and call it Kentucky Friend
 Chicken.  Both trademarks continue to be enforced.

 (Do you have KFC in Japan?)

 Yes, we have KFC in Japan.
 http://www.kfc.co.jp/
 We sometimes recognize Kentucky Fried Chicken and very few mouth it.
 We often recognize ケンタッキーフライドチキン or ケンタッキー and mouth it.
 http://www20.big.or.jp/~nisiguti/store/kfc.html

 We had StarSuite, スタースイート, in Japan.
 http://thenetworkisthecomputer.com/site/?p=699
 :)

 Now does the ASF control use of OpenOffice.org trademark localized versions?
 You can see some examples,
 http://openoffice.exblog.jp/7629990/
 [OOoCon Beijing Logo]  English version
        Simplified Chinese version
 Korean version         Khmer version
        Mayan version
     Traditional Chinese version
             Japanese version
 :)

I have no idea.  But my impression was that Oracle was not withholding
any relevant trademarks or domain names from us.

-Rob

 Thanks,
 khirano

Re: Time for the ASF to send an Open Letter?

2011-11-26 Thread Kazunari Hirano

Hi Rob,

Thanks.

On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 9:44 PM, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote:
 Maybe think of it this way;  Kentucky Fried Chicken decided to rebrand
 itself as KFC because the wanted to deemphasize the fried part,
 for modern health-conscious consumers.  But that doesn't meant that
 anyone can go out and open a store and call it Kentucky Friend
 Chicken.  Both trademarks continue to be enforced.

 (Do you have KFC in Japan?)

Yes, we have KFC in Japan.
http://www.kfc.co.jp/
We sometimes recognize Kentucky Fried Chicken and very few mouth it.
We often recognize ケンタッキーフライドチキン or ケンタッキー and mouth it.
http://www20.big.or.jp/~nisiguti/store/kfc.html

We had StarSuite, スタースイート, in Japan.
http://thenetworkisthecomputer.com/site/?p=699
:)

Now does the ASF control use of OpenOffice.org trademark localized versions?
You can see some examples,
http://openoffice.exblog.jp/7629990/
[OOoCon Beijing Logo]  English version
Simplified Chinese version
Korean version Khmer version
Mayan version
 Traditional Chinese version
 Japanese version
:)
Thanks,
khirano

Re: Time for the ASF to send an Open Letter?

2011-11-22 Thread Kazunari Hirano

Hi Shane, Jim and all,

Thanks.

On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 2:41 AM, Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com wrote:

 On Nov 17, 2011, at 7:24 AM, Kazunari Hirano wrote:

 If we (Apache) use OpenOffice as product name and Apache OpenOffice as
 project name, then we can give Team OOo the OpenOffice.org brand and
 trademark?


 Why would we want to? You don't reward bad behavior so even
 if the ASF did want to give the OOo brand to some 3rd
 party (which we for sure do NOT want to do), it certainly
 wouldn't be TOOo

I see.

I was just wondering what the ASF keeps holding the OpenOffice.org
trademark for if Apache OpenOffice the project will develop and
release Apache OpenOffice the product.

Thanks,
khirano

Re: Time for the ASF to send an Open Letter?

2011-11-22 Thread Rob Weir

On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 6:03 AM, Kazunari Hirano khir...@gmail.com wrote:
 Hi Shane, Jim and all,

 Thanks.

 On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 2:41 AM, Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com wrote:

 On Nov 17, 2011, at 7:24 AM, Kazunari Hirano wrote:

 If we (Apache) use OpenOffice as product name and Apache OpenOffice as
 project name, then we can give Team OOo the OpenOffice.org brand and
 trademark?


 Why would we want to? You don't reward bad behavior so even
 if the ASF did want to give the OOo brand to some 3rd
 party (which we for sure do NOT want to do), it certainly
 wouldn't be TOOo

 I see.

 I was just wondering what the ASF keeps holding the OpenOffice.org
 trademark for if Apache OpenOffice the project will develop and
 release Apache OpenOffice the product.


Maybe think of it this way;  Kentucky Fried Chicken decided to rebrand
itself as KFC because the wanted to deemphasize the fried part,
for modern health-conscious consumers.  But that doesn't meant that
anyone can go out and open a store and call it Kentucky Friend
Chicken.  Both trademarks continue to be enforced.

(Do you have KFC in Japan?)

Regards,

-Rob


 Thanks,
 khirano

Re: Time for the ASF to send an Open Letter?

2011-11-21 Thread Jim Jagielski


On Nov 17, 2011, at 7:24 AM, Kazunari Hirano wrote:
 
 If we (Apache) use OpenOffice as product name and Apache OpenOffice as
 project name, then we can give Team OOo the OpenOffice.org brand and
 trademark?
 

Why would we want to? You don't reward bad behavior so even
if the ASF did want to give the OOo brand to some 3rd
party (which we for sure do NOT want to do), it certainly
wouldn't be TOOo

Re: Time for the ASF to send an Open Letter?

2011-11-18 Thread Martin Hollmichel


On 11/17/11 7:15 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:

Both Stefan and Martin have iCLAs on file.  Both signed up on the Incubator 
Proposal as Initial Committers.  Stefan completed the process to be established 
as a committer.  He is also eligible to be on the PPMC.

I thought I did also, but maybe I got lost somewhere in process,

Martin


Communication and administrative delays, sometimes mine, often arise in the 
establishment of committers.  The process is conducted privately until 
completed.  The only public notification made by the PPMC is when committers 
are established (and they appear on the Apache roster of committers).

  - Dennis

-Original Message-
From: Dave Fisher [mailto:dave2w...@comcast.net]
Sent: Thursday, November 17, 2011 06:39
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: Time for the ASF to send an Open Letter?


On Nov 17, 2011, at 4:30 AM, Tim Williams wrote:


On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 2:51 AM, Dave Fisherdave2w...@comcast.net  wrote:

On Nov 16, 2011, at 12:39 PM, Shane Curcuru wrote:


On 2011-11-16 3:26 PM, Pedro Giffuni wrote:

Hi Martin;

--- On Wed, 11/16/11, Martin Hollmichel wrote:
...

On 11/16/11 6:33 PM, Ross Gardler wrote:

On 16 November 2011 16:56, Martin Hollmichel
martin.hollmic...@googlemail.com

wrote:

...

What kind of a release are you talking about. OOo
releases can only be made from the Apache Software
Foundation. Perhaps you are planning a downstream
release that conforms to our trademark policy.

Please let us know your plans.

we're offering to provide an interim release of
OpenOffice.org 3.3.1 with a joint messaging of ASF and Team
OpenOffice.org. This would fill the gap between the 3.3.0
release from beginning of this year (with some known severe
issues) and the first AOO release in the future. I'm
convinced that this proceeding will help strengthen the
trust in OpenOffice.org / AOO.

Based on the very little bit of information provided here on the Apache lists, 
I can't see how your plans would possibly be approved by the ASF.

Obviously, having more information about your plans, and being able to see your 
work in the form of patches or commits to the AOO podling's Subversion tree 
would be a great start to be able to do this kind of work.

So my first suggestion is to start doing some of the actual coding work here, 
on the ooo-dev@ list.  Then, work with the podling to show the PPMC that this 
is a good idea, and deserves to proceed together with the excellent progress 
the PPMC is making on the 3.4 release.

Then, if the PPMC has a clear consensus to work with such an interim release 
plan, we can discuss any trademark, legal, or press/messaging questions you 
might have.

What is difficult for me to understand is that both Stefan Taxhet and Martin 
Hollmichel signed up as Initial
Committers to the Apache project, but have never signed an iCLA.

What makes you think that?  See: http://people.apache.org/committer-index.html

I looked but it seems my searches on that page failed last night.

Please excuse me on this. Stefan is properly connected to the project, but 
we've seen no email from him until today. I'm not sure why Martin is not 
properly signed up.

Regards,
Dave


--tim

Re: Time for the ASF to send an Open Letter?

2011-11-17 Thread Dave Fisher

Martin,

On Nov 16, 2011, at 11:51 PM, Dave Fisher wrote:

 
 On Nov 16, 2011, at 12:39 PM, Shane Curcuru wrote:
 
 On 2011-11-16 3:26 PM, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
 Hi Martin;
 
 --- On Wed, 11/16/11, Martin Hollmichel wrote:
 ...
 On 11/16/11 6:33 PM, Ross Gardler wrote:
 On 16 November 2011 16:56, Martin Hollmichel
 martin.hollmic...@googlemail.com
 wrote:
 
 ...
 
 What kind of a release are you talking about. OOo
 releases can only be made from the Apache Software
 Foundation. Perhaps you are planning a downstream
 release that conforms to our trademark policy.
 
 Please let us know your plans.
 we're offering to provide an interim release of
 OpenOffice.org 3.3.1 with a joint messaging of ASF and Team
 OpenOffice.org. This would fill the gap between the 3.3.0
 release from beginning of this year (with some known severe
 issues) and the first AOO release in the future. I'm
 convinced that this proceeding will help strengthen the
 trust in OpenOffice.org / AOO.
 
 Based on the very little bit of information provided here on the Apache 
 lists, I can't see how your plans would possibly be approved by the ASF.
 
 Obviously, having more information about your plans, and being able to see 
 your work in the form of patches or commits to the AOO podling's Subversion 
 tree would be a great start to be able to do this kind of work.
 
 So my first suggestion is to start doing some of the actual coding work 
 here, on the ooo-dev@ list.  Then, work with the podling to show the PPMC 
 that this is a good idea, and deserves to proceed together with the 
 excellent progress the PPMC is making on the 3.4 release.
 
 Then, if the PPMC has a clear consensus to work with such an interim release 
 plan, we can discuss any trademark, legal, or press/messaging questions you 
 might have.
 
 What is difficult for me to understand is that both Stefan Taxhet and Martin 
 Hollmichel signed up as Initial Committers to the Apache project, but have 
 never signed an iCLA. There are many more than four people involved.
 
 The Team OpenOffice website must immediately acknowledge that OpenOffice.org 
 is a registered trademark of the Apache Software Foundation.
 
 The Team OpenOffice site must recognize the Apache project.
 
 I don't think a joint statement is appropriate without properly respectful 
 actions beforehand.

The following text on the teamopenoffice.org site is still in place!

 Your donation counts: Save OpenOffice.org!
 The world needs a free, open source office software – but the genuine article 
 is under threat. We don’t want to let this happen!

Ridiculous! openoffice.org is the Apache project - the genuine article is not 
under threat.

It has been a month since:

http://www.itworld.com/it-managementstrategy/213997/apache-disavows-team-openofficeorg-ev

I really feel that the individuals on the project want to welcome Team OOo to 
the project, I know I do.

It is my feeling that Team OOo should make a proposal to the AOOo PPMC about 
how they wish to use the OpenOffice.org brand.

Regards,
Dave

 
 Regards,
 Dave
 
 
 
 - Shane
 
 
 
 As much as we would like to do an interim release I am
 afraid there are issues that won't make it possible:
 
 - Apache releases have to be approved by the PPMC and
 can only be released under an Apache License.
 - The old OpenOffice.Org made available 3.4 RC, releasing
 3.3.1 would not give the right signal wrt continuity.
 - The ASF, through the PPMC, cannot approve code that it
 hasn't seen and AFAICT Team OOo hasn't been very visible
 here in the community (sorry if I just missed it).
 
 This said, 3.4 is advancing very nicely. I don't want to
 hurry things but I think we are moving in the right
 direction.
 
 Pedro.

Re: Time for the ASF to send an Open Letter?

2011-11-17 Thread Donald Harbison

On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 3:17 AM, Dave Fisher dave2w...@comcast.net wrote:

Martin,

On Nov 16, 2011, at 11:51 PM, Dave Fisher wrote:

On Nov 16, 2011, at 12:39 PM, Shane Curcuru wrote:

On 2011-11-16 3:26 PM, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
Hi Martin;

--- On Wed, 11/16/11, Martin Hollmichel wrote:
...
On 11/16/11 6:33 PM, Ross Gardler wrote:
On 16 November 2011 16:56, Martin Hollmichel
martin.hollmic...@googlemail.com
wrote:

...

What kind of a release are you talking about. OOo
releases can only be made from the Apache Software
Foundation. Perhaps you are planning a downstream
release that conforms to our trademark policy.

Please let us know your plans.
we're offering to provide an interim release of
OpenOffice.org 3.3.1 with a joint messaging of ASF and Team
OpenOffice.org. This would fill the gap between the 3.3.0
release from beginning of this year (with some known severe
issues) and the first AOO release in the future. I'm
convinced that this proceeding will help strengthen the
trust in OpenOffice.org / AOO.

Based on the very little bit of information provided here on the Apache
lists, I can't see how your plans would possibly be approved by the ASF.

Obviously, having more information about your plans, and being able to
see your work in the form of patches or commits to the AOO podling's
Subversion tree would be a great start to be able to do this kind of work.

So my first suggestion is to start doing some of the actual coding work
here, on the ooo-dev@ list. Then, work with the podling to show the PPMC
that this is a good idea, and deserves to proceed together with the
excellent progress the PPMC is making on the 3.4 release.

Then, if the PPMC has a clear consensus to work with such an interim
release plan, we can discuss any trademark, legal, or press/messaging
questions you might have.

What is difficult for me to understand is that both Stefan Taxhet and
Martin Hollmichel signed up as Initial Committers to the Apache project,
but have never signed an iCLA. There are many more than four people
involved.

The Team OpenOffice website must immediately acknowledge that
OpenOffice.org is a registered trademark of the Apache Software Foundation.

The Team OpenOffice site must recognize the Apache project.

I don't think a joint statement is appropriate without properly
respectful actions beforehand.

The following text on the teamopenoffice.org site is still in place!

Your donation counts: Save OpenOffice.org!
The world needs a free, open source office software – but the genuine
article is under threat. We don’t want to let this happen!

Ridiculous! openoffice.org is the Apache project - the genuine article is
not under threat.

It has been a month since:

http://www.itworld.com/it-managementstrategy/213997/apache-disavows-team-openofficeorg-ev

I really feel that the individuals on the project want to welcome Team OOo
to the project, I know I do.

Absolutely agree. These guys are very welcome to align with this project.

It is my feeling that Team OOo should make a proposal to the AOOo PPMC
about how they wish to use the OpenOffice.org brand.

+1 We will continue to ask for this, but in the meantime, the web site
language you cite above must come down. There is no 'threat' to
OpenOffice.org.

Regards,
Dave

- Shane

As much as we would like to do an interim release I am
afraid there are issues that won't make it possible:

- Apache releases have to be approved by the PPMC and
can only be released under an Apache License.
- The old OpenOffice.Org made available 3.4 RC, releasing
3.3.1 would not give the right signal wrt continuity.
- The ASF, through the PPMC, cannot approve code that it
hasn't seen and AFAICT Team OOo hasn't been very visible
here in the community (sorry if I just missed it).

This said, 3.4 is advancing very nicely. I don't want to
hurry things but I think we are moving in the right
direction.

Pedro.

Re: Time for the ASF to send an Open Letter?

2011-11-17 Thread Kazunari Hirano

Hi all,

On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 9:10 PM, Donald Harbison dpharbi...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 3:17 AM, Dave Fisher dave2w...@comcast.net wrote:

Martin,

On Nov 16, 2011, at 11:51 PM, Dave Fisher wrote:

On Nov 16, 2011, at 12:39 PM, Shane Curcuru wrote:

On 2011-11-16 3:26 PM, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
Hi Martin;

--- On Wed, 11/16/11, Martin Hollmichel wrote:
...
On 11/16/11 6:33 PM, Ross Gardler wrote:
On 16 November 2011 16:56, Martin Hollmichel
martin.hollmic...@googlemail.com
wrote:

...

What kind of a release are you talking about. OOo
releases can only be made from the Apache Software
Foundation. Perhaps you are planning a downstream
release that conforms to our trademark policy.

Based on the very little bit of information provided here on the Apache
lists, I can't see how your plans would possibly be approved by the ASF.

Then, if the PPMC has a clear consensus to work with such an interim
release plan, we can discuss any trademark, legal, or press/messaging
questions you might have.

The Team OpenOffice website must immediately acknowledge that
OpenOffice.org is a registered trademark of the Apache Software Foundation.

The Team OpenOffice site must recognize the Apache project.

I don't think a joint statement is appropriate without properly
respectful actions beforehand.

The following text on the teamopenoffice.org site is still in place!

Your donation counts: Save OpenOffice.org!
The world needs a free, open source office software – but the genuine
article is under threat. We don’t want to let this happen!

Ridiculous! openoffice.org is the Apache project - the genuine article is
not under threat.

It has been a month since:

http://www.itworld.com/it-managementstrategy/213997/apache-disavows-team-openofficeorg-ev

I really feel that the individuals on the project want to welcome Team OOo
to the project, I know I do.

Absolutely agree. These guys are very welcome to align with this project.

It is my feeling that Team OOo should make a proposal to the AOOo PPMC
about how they wish to use the OpenOffice.org brand.

+1 We will continue to ask for this, but in the meantime, the web site
language you cite above must come down. There is no 'threat' to
OpenOffice.org.

If we (Apache) use OpenOffice as product name and Apache OpenOffice as
project name, then we can give Team OOo the OpenOffice.org brand and
trademark?

Thanks,
khirano

Re: Time for the ASF to send an Open Letter?

2011-11-17 Thread Tim Williams

On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 2:51 AM, Dave Fisher dave2w...@comcast.net wrote:

 On Nov 16, 2011, at 12:39 PM, Shane Curcuru wrote:

 On 2011-11-16 3:26 PM, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
 Hi Martin;

 --- On Wed, 11/16/11, Martin Hollmichel wrote:
 ...
 On 11/16/11 6:33 PM, Ross Gardler wrote:
 On 16 November 2011 16:56, Martin Hollmichel
 martin.hollmic...@googlemail.com
 wrote:

 ...

 What kind of a release are you talking about. OOo
 releases can only be made from the Apache Software
 Foundation. Perhaps you are planning a downstream
 release that conforms to our trademark policy.

 Please let us know your plans.
 we're offering to provide an interim release of
 OpenOffice.org 3.3.1 with a joint messaging of ASF and Team
 OpenOffice.org. This would fill the gap between the 3.3.0
 release from beginning of this year (with some known severe
 issues) and the first AOO release in the future. I'm
 convinced that this proceeding will help strengthen the
 trust in OpenOffice.org / AOO.

 Based on the very little bit of information provided here on the Apache 
 lists, I can't see how your plans would possibly be approved by the ASF.

 Obviously, having more information about your plans, and being able to see 
 your work in the form of patches or commits to the AOO podling's Subversion 
 tree would be a great start to be able to do this kind of work.

 So my first suggestion is to start doing some of the actual coding work 
 here, on the ooo-dev@ list.  Then, work with the podling to show the PPMC 
 that this is a good idea, and deserves to proceed together with the 
 excellent progress the PPMC is making on the 3.4 release.

 Then, if the PPMC has a clear consensus to work with such an interim release 
 plan, we can discuss any trademark, legal, or press/messaging questions you 
 might have.

 What is difficult for me to understand is that both Stefan Taxhet and Martin 
 Hollmichel signed up as Initial
 Committers to the Apache project, but have never signed an iCLA.

What makes you think that?  See: http://people.apache.org/committer-index.html

--tim

Re: Time for the ASF to send an Open Letter?

2011-11-17 Thread Donald Harbison

On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 7:24 AM, Kazunari Hirano khir...@gmail.com wrote:

Hi all,

On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 9:10 PM, Donald Harbison dpharbi...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 3:17 AM, Dave Fisher dave2w...@comcast.net
wrote:

Martin,

On Nov 16, 2011, at 11:51 PM, Dave Fisher wrote:

On Nov 16, 2011, at 12:39 PM, Shane Curcuru wrote:

On 2011-11-16 3:26 PM, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
Hi Martin;

--- On Wed, 11/16/11, Martin Hollmichel wrote:
...
On 11/16/11 6:33 PM, Ross Gardler wrote:
On 16 November 2011 16:56, Martin Hollmichel
martin.hollmic...@googlemail.com
wrote:

...

What kind of a release are you talking about. OOo
releases can only be made from the Apache Software
Foundation. Perhaps you are planning a downstream
release that conforms to our trademark policy.

Based on the very little bit of information provided here on the
Apache
lists, I can't see how your plans would possibly be approved by the ASF.

Obviously, having more information about your plans, and being able
to
see your work in the form of patches or commits to the AOO podling's
Subversion tree would be a great start to be able to do this kind of
work.

So my first suggestion is to start doing some of the actual coding
work
here, on the ooo-dev@ list. Then, work with the podling to show the
PPMC
that this is a good idea, and deserves to proceed together with the
excellent progress the PPMC is making on the 3.4 release.

Then, if the PPMC has a clear consensus to work with such an interim
release plan, we can discuss any trademark, legal, or press/messaging
questions you might have.

The Team OpenOffice website must immediately acknowledge that
OpenOffice.org is a registered trademark of the Apache Software
Foundation.

The Team OpenOffice site must recognize the Apache project.

I don't think a joint statement is appropriate without properly
respectful actions beforehand.

The following text on the teamopenoffice.org site is still in place!

Your donation counts: Save OpenOffice.org!
The world needs a free, open source office software – but the genuine
article is under threat. We don’t want to let this happen!

Ridiculous! openoffice.org is the Apache project - the genuine article
is
not under threat.

It has been a month since:

http://www.itworld.com/it-managementstrategy/213997/apache-disavows-team-openofficeorg-ev

I really feel that the individuals on the project want to welcome Team
OOo
to the project, I know I do.

Absolutely agree. These guys are very welcome to align with this project.

It is my feeling that Team OOo should make a proposal to the AOOo PPMC
about how they wish to use the OpenOffice.org brand.

+1 We will continue to ask for this, but in the meantime, the web site
language you cite above must come down. There is no 'threat' to
OpenOffice.org.

If we (Apache) use OpenOffice as product name and Apache OpenOffice as
project name, then we can give Team OOo the OpenOffice.org brand and
trademark?

Apache officers have requested a proposal from the Team OpenOffice people.
AFAIK, no proposal has been received. In the meantime, the language on
their website is damaging to the OpenOffice.org trademark and brand.

It's unlikely the PPMC will permit use of the OpenOffice.org trademark
until such time as their web site is corrected, and a proposal is received
for consideration.

Thanks,
khirano

Re: Time for the ASF to send an Open Letter?

2011-11-17 Thread Rob Weir

On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 7:24 AM, Kazunari Hirano khir...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi all,

On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 9:10 PM, Donald Harbison dpharbi...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 3:17 AM, Dave Fisher dave2w...@comcast.net wrote:

Martin,

On Nov 16, 2011, at 11:51 PM, Dave Fisher wrote:

On Nov 16, 2011, at 12:39 PM, Shane Curcuru wrote:

On 2011-11-16 3:26 PM, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
Hi Martin;

--- On Wed, 11/16/11, Martin Hollmichel wrote:
...
On 11/16/11 6:33 PM, Ross Gardler wrote:
On 16 November 2011 16:56, Martin Hollmichel
martin.hollmic...@googlemail.com
wrote:

...

What kind of a release are you talking about. OOo
releases can only be made from the Apache Software
Foundation. Perhaps you are planning a downstream
release that conforms to our trademark policy.

Based on the very little bit of information provided here on the Apache
lists, I can't see how your plans would possibly be approved by the ASF.

Then, if the PPMC has a clear consensus to work with such an interim
release plan, we can discuss any trademark, legal, or press/messaging
questions you might have.

The Team OpenOffice website must immediately acknowledge that
OpenOffice.org is a registered trademark of the Apache Software Foundation.

The Team OpenOffice site must recognize the Apache project.

I don't think a joint statement is appropriate without properly
respectful actions beforehand.

The following text on the teamopenoffice.org site is still in place!

Your donation counts: Save OpenOffice.org!
The world needs a free, open source office software – but the genuine
article is under threat. We don’t want to let this happen!

Ridiculous! openoffice.org is the Apache project - the genuine article is
not under threat.

It has been a month since:

http://www.itworld.com/it-managementstrategy/213997/apache-disavows-team-openofficeorg-ev

I really feel that the individuals on the project want to welcome Team OOo
to the project, I know I do.

Absolutely agree. These guys are very welcome to align with this project.

It is my feeling that Team OOo should make a proposal to the AOOo PPMC
about how they wish to use the OpenOffice.org brand.

+1 We will continue to ask for this, but in the meantime, the web site
language you cite above must come down. There is no 'threat' to
OpenOffice.org.

If we (Apache) use OpenOffice as product name and Apache OpenOffice as
project name, then we can give Team OOo the OpenOffice.org brand and
trademark?

I don't think so. Part of protecting a brand is to prevent confusing
similarity., For example, we could not go out and sell soft drinks
under the name Coca-Cola.org or pizza under the name Pizza
Hut.net.

-Rob

Thanks,
khirano

Re: Time for the ASF to send an Open Letter?

2011-11-17 Thread Shane Curcuru


On 2011-11-17 7:24 AM, Kazunari Hirano wrote:
...snip...

If we (Apache) use OpenOffice as product name and Apache OpenOffice as
project name, then we can give Team OOo the OpenOffice.org brand and
trademark?


No, the ASF will not do that.

- Shane, VP, Brand Management

Re: Time for the ASF to send an Open Letter?

2011-11-17 Thread Kazunari Hirano

Hi Rob and all,

On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 10:23 PM, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote:
 I don't think so.  Part of protecting a brand is to prevent confusing
 similarity.,  For example, we could not go out and sell soft drinks
 under the name Coca-Cola.org or pizza under the name Pizza
 Hut.net.

I see.

In Japan OpenOffice is the registered trademark (No.4688483,
registered on July 4, 2003) [1] owned by Fuji Xerox Co., Ltd.[2]

[1] 
http://www1.ipdl.inpit.go.jp/syutsugan/TM_DETAIL_A.cgi?02015132153723258785500651374
[2] http://www.fujixerox.co.jp/company/about/oof.html

We have been using OpenOffice.org for a long time in Japan, no problem.
:)

Thanks,
khirano

Re: Time for the ASF to send an Open Letter?

2011-11-17 Thread Rob Weir

On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 8:56 AM, Kazunari Hirano khir...@gmail.com wrote:
 Hi Rob and all,

 On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 10:23 PM, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote:
 I don't think so.  Part of protecting a brand is to prevent confusing
 similarity.,  For example, we could not go out and sell soft drinks
 under the name Coca-Cola.org or pizza under the name Pizza
 Hut.net.

 I see.

 In Japan OpenOffice is the registered trademark (No.4688483,
 registered on July 4, 2003) [1] owned by Fuji Xerox Co., Ltd.[2]

 [1] 
 http://www1.ipdl.inpit.go.jp/syutsugan/TM_DETAIL_A.cgi?02015132153723258785500651374
 [2] http://www.fujixerox.co.jp/company/about/oof.html

 We have been using OpenOffice.org for a long time in Japan, no problem.
 :)


And that is fine.   A trademark is for a particular category of
product.  The Japanese trademark is not for personal productivity
applications.  It is possible for the same name to be used in
different trademarks, if they are used for different things and they
would not cause confusion.

 Thanks,
 khirano

Re: Time for the ASF to send an Open Letter?

2011-11-17 Thread Stefan Taxhet


Hi,

Am 17.11.2011 08:51, schrieb Dave Fisher:


What is difficult for me to understand is that both Stefan Taxhet and Martin 
Hollmichel
signed up as Initial Committers to the Apache project, but have never signed an 
iCLA.


Martin and I sent signed iCLAs to secretary@
Is there a page where this should be/is acknowledged or
did we miss some additional formality?


There are many more than four people involved.

The Team OpenOffice website must immediately acknowledge that OpenOffice.org is 
a registered trademark of the Apache Software Foundation.


Please point us to the phrase you want to be used.
Is it just the adaption of the phrases that are at
http://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/list/ ?


The Team OpenOffice site must recognize the Apache project.


We plan to mention the players in the arena (Apache/AOO, TDF/LO) on the 
website. Which form of recognition of the Apache project could you think of?


And yes, we are aware that the website content in general needs an update.

Greetings
Stefan



I don't think a joint statement is appropriate without properly respectful 
actions beforehand.

Regards,
Dave




- Shane





As much as we would like to do an interim release I am
afraid there are issues that won't make it possible:

- Apache releases have to be approved by the PPMC and
can only be released under an Apache License.
- The old OpenOffice.Org made available 3.4 RC, releasing
3.3.1 would not give the right signal wrt continuity.
- The ASF, through the PPMC, cannot approve code that it
hasn't seen and AFAICT Team OOo hasn't been very visible
here in the community (sorry if I just missed it).

This said, 3.4 is advancing very nicely. I don't want to
hurry things but I think we are moving in the right
direction.

Pedro.

Re: Time for the ASF to send an Open Letter?

2011-11-17 Thread Dave Fisher


On Nov 17, 2011, at 4:30 AM, Tim Williams wrote:

 On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 2:51 AM, Dave Fisher dave2w...@comcast.net wrote:
 
 On Nov 16, 2011, at 12:39 PM, Shane Curcuru wrote:
 
 On 2011-11-16 3:26 PM, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
 Hi Martin;
 
 --- On Wed, 11/16/11, Martin Hollmichel wrote:
 ...
 On 11/16/11 6:33 PM, Ross Gardler wrote:
 On 16 November 2011 16:56, Martin Hollmichel
 martin.hollmic...@googlemail.com
 wrote:
 
 ...
 
 What kind of a release are you talking about. OOo
 releases can only be made from the Apache Software
 Foundation. Perhaps you are planning a downstream
 release that conforms to our trademark policy.
 
 Please let us know your plans.
 we're offering to provide an interim release of
 OpenOffice.org 3.3.1 with a joint messaging of ASF and Team
 OpenOffice.org. This would fill the gap between the 3.3.0
 release from beginning of this year (with some known severe
 issues) and the first AOO release in the future. I'm
 convinced that this proceeding will help strengthen the
 trust in OpenOffice.org / AOO.
 
 Based on the very little bit of information provided here on the Apache 
 lists, I can't see how your plans would possibly be approved by the ASF.
 
 Obviously, having more information about your plans, and being able to see 
 your work in the form of patches or commits to the AOO podling's Subversion 
 tree would be a great start to be able to do this kind of work.
 
 So my first suggestion is to start doing some of the actual coding work 
 here, on the ooo-dev@ list.  Then, work with the podling to show the PPMC 
 that this is a good idea, and deserves to proceed together with the 
 excellent progress the PPMC is making on the 3.4 release.
 
 Then, if the PPMC has a clear consensus to work with such an interim 
 release plan, we can discuss any trademark, legal, or press/messaging 
 questions you might have.
 
 What is difficult for me to understand is that both Stefan Taxhet and Martin 
 Hollmichel signed up as Initial
 Committers to the Apache project, but have never signed an iCLA.
 
 What makes you think that?  See: http://people.apache.org/committer-index.html

I looked but it seems my searches on that page failed last night.

Please excuse me on this. Stefan is properly connected to the project, but 
we've seen no email from him until today. I'm not sure why Martin is not 
properly signed up.

Regards,
Dave

 
 --tim

Re: Time for the ASF to send an Open Letter?

2011-11-17 Thread Kazunari Hirano

Hi Rob and all,

On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 11:02 PM, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote:
 And that is fine.   A trademark is for a particular category of
 product.  The Japanese trademark is not for personal productivity
 applications.  It is possible for the same name to be used in
 different trademarks, if they are used for different things and they
 would not cause confusion.

I see.  Thanks.

Now who will confuse Apache OpenOffice with OpenOffice.org?

Thanks,
khirano

RE: Time for the ASF to send an Open Letter?

2011-11-17 Thread Dennis E. Hamilton

Both Stefan and Martin have iCLAs on file.  Both signed up on the Incubator 
Proposal as Initial Committers.  Stefan completed the process to be established 
as a committer.  He is also eligible to be on the PPMC.  

Communication and administrative delays, sometimes mine, often arise in the 
establishment of committers.  The process is conducted privately until 
completed.  The only public notification made by the PPMC is when committers 
are established (and they appear on the Apache roster of committers).

 - Dennis

-Original Message-
From: Dave Fisher [mailto:dave2w...@comcast.net] 
Sent: Thursday, November 17, 2011 06:39
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: Time for the ASF to send an Open Letter?


On Nov 17, 2011, at 4:30 AM, Tim Williams wrote:

 On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 2:51 AM, Dave Fisher dave2w...@comcast.net wrote:
 
 On Nov 16, 2011, at 12:39 PM, Shane Curcuru wrote:
 
 On 2011-11-16 3:26 PM, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
 Hi Martin;
 
 --- On Wed, 11/16/11, Martin Hollmichel wrote:
 ...
 On 11/16/11 6:33 PM, Ross Gardler wrote:
 On 16 November 2011 16:56, Martin Hollmichel
 martin.hollmic...@googlemail.com
 wrote:
 
 ...
 
 What kind of a release are you talking about. OOo
 releases can only be made from the Apache Software
 Foundation. Perhaps you are planning a downstream
 release that conforms to our trademark policy.
 
 Please let us know your plans.
 we're offering to provide an interim release of
 OpenOffice.org 3.3.1 with a joint messaging of ASF and Team
 OpenOffice.org. This would fill the gap between the 3.3.0
 release from beginning of this year (with some known severe
 issues) and the first AOO release in the future. I'm
 convinced that this proceeding will help strengthen the
 trust in OpenOffice.org / AOO.
 
 Based on the very little bit of information provided here on the Apache 
 lists, I can't see how your plans would possibly be approved by the ASF.
 
 Obviously, having more information about your plans, and being able to see 
 your work in the form of patches or commits to the AOO podling's Subversion 
 tree would be a great start to be able to do this kind of work.
 
 So my first suggestion is to start doing some of the actual coding work 
 here, on the ooo-dev@ list.  Then, work with the podling to show the PPMC 
 that this is a good idea, and deserves to proceed together with the 
 excellent progress the PPMC is making on the 3.4 release.
 
 Then, if the PPMC has a clear consensus to work with such an interim 
 release plan, we can discuss any trademark, legal, or press/messaging 
 questions you might have.
 
 What is difficult for me to understand is that both Stefan Taxhet and Martin 
 Hollmichel signed up as Initial
 Committers to the Apache project, but have never signed an iCLA.
 
 What makes you think that?  See: http://people.apache.org/committer-index.html

I looked but it seems my searches on that page failed last night.

Please excuse me on this. Stefan is properly connected to the project, but 
we've seen no email from him until today. I'm not sure why Martin is not 
properly signed up.

Regards,
Dave

 
 --tim

Re: Time for the ASF to send an Open Letter?

2011-11-16 Thread Donald Harbison

On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 5:31 AM, Martin Hollmichel 
martin.hollmic...@googlemail.com wrote:

 On 11/15/11 6:46 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:

 I have been mulling this over for a long time...

 Up to now, we have been reactionary. We have allowed others to
 control and distort the message, paint things as a us vs. them
 battle (simply to position themselves for personal gain in the
 whole debacle), and foster FUD to the clear harm of the ENTIRE
 OOo ecosystem.

 I think it's time that an Open Letter to the entire Open Office
 ecosystem (companies, entities, individuals, etc...) be drafted
 that sets the record straight.

 And I volunteer to drive this task...

 I think this is an excellent idea, this also fit's in plans to do an
 interim release OOo 3.3.1 release. We've just done with displaying the OOo
 readme file after 3.3.1 installation, this would be in ideal place for
 promoting such an Open Letter,


 Are you referring to plans from TeamOpenOffice.org e.V.? What is the
current status of these? What is the plan for naming and branding? Perhaps
you can update this community in a separate topic.

Comments?

 Martin

Re: Time for the ASF to send an Open Letter?

2011-11-16 Thread Jim Jagielski


On Nov 15, 2011, at 3:57 PM, Ross Gardler wrote:

 On 15 November 2011 18:31, Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com wrote:
 Why the AL is important for such a standard
 such as Open Office and ODF;
 
 Hey, we can even quote Stallman there.
 
 I'm not sure I'm +1 on an open letter or not. I certainly like Rob's
 manifesto/top ten type idea. I'm not sure we need something that might
 be seen as aggressive, if the TDF as a whole really reacted the way we
 were told then such a letter may be seen as an attack on the TDF
 itself, rather than an attempt to address FUD from a few.
 

I like the manifesto/top ten type idea, but I also feel the
need for an Open Letter as well. For example, I have heard
from reliable sources that some companies have been convinced
that they should not donate any patches to AOOo and instead should
donate them to another entity. An open letter could describe why
this is harmful to the entire OOo ecosystem.

Let's see how far the manifesto/top ten type idea goes and maybe
I'll be appeased ;)

Re: Time for the ASF to send an Open Letter?

2011-11-16 Thread Ian Lynch

On 16 November 2011 12:42, Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com wrote:


 On Nov 15, 2011, at 3:57 PM, Ross Gardler wrote:

  On 15 November 2011 18:31, Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com wrote:
  Why the AL is important for such a standard
  such as Open Office and ODF;
 
  Hey, we can even quote Stallman there.
 
  I'm not sure I'm +1 on an open letter or not. I certainly like Rob's
  manifesto/top ten type idea. I'm not sure we need something that might
  be seen as aggressive, if the TDF as a whole really reacted the way we
  were told then such a letter may be seen as an attack on the TDF
  itself, rather than an attempt to address FUD from a few.

 I like the manifesto/top ten type idea, but I also feel the
 need for an Open Letter as well. For example, I have heard
 from reliable sources that some companies have been convinced
 that they should not donate any patches to AOOo and instead should
 donate them to another entity. An open letter could describe why
 this is harmful to the entire OOo ecosystem.


I think a key message related to that is that ASF wants the widest possible
take up of products based on the Apache OpenOffice code base so that the
ODF standard is strengthened across the whole ecosystem.

I should think that simple message is enough to counter any others without
upsetting anyone.

Let's see how far the manifesto/top ten type idea goes and maybe
 I'll be appeased ;)




-- 
Ian

Ofqual Accredited IT Qualifications (The Schools ITQ)

www.theINGOTs.org +44 (0)1827 305940

The Learning Machine Limited, Reg Office, 36 Ashby Road, Tamworth,
Staffordshire, B79 8AQ. Reg No: 05560797, Registered in England and
Wales.

Re: Time for the ASF to send an Open Letter?

2011-11-16 Thread Martin Hollmichel


On 11/16/11 1:15 PM, Donald Harbison wrote:

On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 5:31 AM, Martin Hollmichel
martin.hollmic...@googlemail.com  wrote:


On 11/15/11 6:46 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:


I have been mulling this over for a long time...

Up to now, we have been reactionary. We have allowed others to
control and distort the message, paint things as a us vs. them
battle (simply to position themselves for personal gain in the
whole debacle), and foster FUD to the clear harm of the ENTIRE
OOo ecosystem.

I think it's time that an Open Letter to the entire Open Office
ecosystem (companies, entities, individuals, etc...) be drafted
that sets the record straight.

And I volunteer to drive this task...


I think this is an excellent idea, this also fit's in plans to do an
interim release OOo 3.3.1 release. We've just done with displaying the OOo
readme file after 3.3.1 installation, this would be in ideal place for
promoting such an Open Letter,


Are you referring to plans from TeamOpenOffice.org e.V.? What is the

current status of these? What is the plan for naming and branding? Perhaps
you can update this community in a separate topic.
removal of the Oracle branding is the easy part. As said before, having 
a joint messaging with ASF about this release and the future releases is 
some work to do. Adopting references from old OpenOffice.org instances 
(forums, mailing lists, issue tracking) to the new ones in the ReadMe 
File is another issue we are still working on.


The coding work we've done in the 3.3.1 is about some security and 
bugfixing issues,


Martin



Comments?

Martin

Re: Time for the ASF to send an Open Letter?

2011-11-16 Thread Pedro Giffuni

Hi Martin;

--- On Wed, 11/16/11, Martin Hollmichel wrote:
...
 On 11/16/11 6:33 PM, Ross Gardler wrote:
  On 16 November 2011 16:56, Martin Hollmichel
  martin.hollmic...@googlemail.com 
 wrote:
  
...
  
  What kind of a release are you talking about. OOo
  releases can only be made from the Apache Software
  Foundation. Perhaps you are planning a downstream
  release that conforms to our trademark policy.
  
  Please let us know your plans.
 we're offering to provide an interim release of
 OpenOffice.org 3.3.1 with a joint messaging of ASF and Team
 OpenOffice.org. This would fill the gap between the 3.3.0
 release from beginning of this year (with some known severe
 issues) and the first AOO release in the future. I'm
 convinced that this proceeding will help strengthen the
 trust in OpenOffice.org / AOO.


As much as we would like to do an interim release I am
afraid there are issues that won't make it possible:

- Apache releases have to be approved by the PPMC and
can only be released under an Apache License.
- The old OpenOffice.Org made available 3.4 RC, releasing
3.3.1 would not give the right signal wrt continuity.
- The ASF, through the PPMC, cannot approve code that it
hasn't seen and AFAICT Team OOo hasn't been very visible
here in the community (sorry if I just missed it).

This said, 3.4 is advancing very nicely. I don't want to
hurry things but I think we are moving in the right
direction.

Pedro.

Re: Time for the ASF to send an Open Letter?

2011-11-16 Thread Shane Curcuru


On 2011-11-16 3:26 PM, Pedro Giffuni wrote:

Hi Martin;

--- On Wed, 11/16/11, Martin Hollmichel wrote:
...

On 11/16/11 6:33 PM, Ross Gardler wrote:

On 16 November 2011 16:56, Martin Hollmichel
martin.hollmic...@googlemail.com

wrote:



...


What kind of a release are you talking about. OOo
releases can only be made from the Apache Software
Foundation. Perhaps you are planning a downstream
release that conforms to our trademark policy.

Please let us know your plans.

we're offering to provide an interim release of
OpenOffice.org 3.3.1 with a joint messaging of ASF and Team
OpenOffice.org. This would fill the gap between the 3.3.0
release from beginning of this year (with some known severe
issues) and the first AOO release in the future. I'm
convinced that this proceeding will help strengthen the
trust in OpenOffice.org / AOO.


Based on the very little bit of information provided here on the Apache 
lists, I can't see how your plans would possibly be approved by the ASF.


Obviously, having more information about your plans, and being able to 
see your work in the form of patches or commits to the AOO podling's 
Subversion tree would be a great start to be able to do this kind of work.


So my first suggestion is to start doing some of the actual coding work 
here, on the ooo-dev@ list.  Then, work with the podling to show the 
PPMC that this is a good idea, and deserves to proceed together with the 
excellent progress the PPMC is making on the 3.4 release.


Then, if the PPMC has a clear consensus to work with such an interim 
release plan, we can discuss any trademark, legal, or press/messaging 
questions you might have.


- Shane





As much as we would like to do an interim release I am
afraid there are issues that won't make it possible:

- Apache releases have to be approved by the PPMC and
can only be released under an Apache License.
- The old OpenOffice.Org made available 3.4 RC, releasing
3.3.1 would not give the right signal wrt continuity.
- The ASF, through the PPMC, cannot approve code that it
hasn't seen and AFAICT Team OOo hasn't been very visible
here in the community (sorry if I just missed it).

This said, 3.4 is advancing very nicely. I don't want to
hurry things but I think we are moving in the right
direction.

Pedro.

Re: Time for the ASF to send an Open Letter?

2011-11-16 Thread Shane Curcuru

I just want to make one observation that is critical to understanding 
how Apache projects work:


On 2011-11-16 11:56 AM, Martin Hollmichel wrote:
...snip...

The coding work we've done in the 3.3.1 is about some security and
bugfixing issues,

Martin


I would strongly urge everyone here to read the brief Code of Conduct 
for Apache projects here:


http://community.apache.org/newbiefaq.html#NewbieFAQ-IsthereaCodeofConductforApacheprojects?

In particular, the old saying that If it didn't happen on a mailing 
list, it didn't happen. is critically important to understand.


I know that Martin and others have done a tremendous amount of work for 
the past OpenOffice.org project, and I bet that he and others will 
continue to create great code in the future OOo related ecosystem.


However the comment above is quite disingenuous, given that none of that 
work (as far as I can tell) in terms of code or planning has been here 
on ooo-dev@.


The Apache OpenOffice podling is truly happy to have people donate their 
work to the podling, and hopes more people will choose to contribute 
their work collaboratively here on the list.  We are also - as all 
Apache projects are - happy to have third parties take the code we 
produce under our permissive Apache License and use it for virtually any 
purpose they wish.  All that we ask when you take are code is that you 
follow the license, and that you respect our identity, brands, and 
trademarks.


- Shane, mentor for AOO podling

Re: Time for the ASF to send an Open Letter?

2011-11-16 Thread Dave Fisher


On Nov 16, 2011, at 12:39 PM, Shane Curcuru wrote:

 On 2011-11-16 3:26 PM, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
 Hi Martin;
 
 --- On Wed, 11/16/11, Martin Hollmichel wrote:
 ...
 On 11/16/11 6:33 PM, Ross Gardler wrote:
 On 16 November 2011 16:56, Martin Hollmichel
 martin.hollmic...@googlemail.com
 wrote:
 
 ...
 
 What kind of a release are you talking about. OOo
 releases can only be made from the Apache Software
 Foundation. Perhaps you are planning a downstream
 release that conforms to our trademark policy.
 
 Please let us know your plans.
 we're offering to provide an interim release of
 OpenOffice.org 3.3.1 with a joint messaging of ASF and Team
 OpenOffice.org. This would fill the gap between the 3.3.0
 release from beginning of this year (with some known severe
 issues) and the first AOO release in the future. I'm
 convinced that this proceeding will help strengthen the
 trust in OpenOffice.org / AOO.
 
 Based on the very little bit of information provided here on the Apache 
 lists, I can't see how your plans would possibly be approved by the ASF.
 
 Obviously, having more information about your plans, and being able to see 
 your work in the form of patches or commits to the AOO podling's Subversion 
 tree would be a great start to be able to do this kind of work.
 
 So my first suggestion is to start doing some of the actual coding work here, 
 on the ooo-dev@ list.  Then, work with the podling to show the PPMC that this 
 is a good idea, and deserves to proceed together with the excellent progress 
 the PPMC is making on the 3.4 release.
 
 Then, if the PPMC has a clear consensus to work with such an interim release 
 plan, we can discuss any trademark, legal, or press/messaging questions you 
 might have.

What is difficult for me to understand is that both Stefan Taxhet and Martin 
Hollmichel signed up as Initial Committers to the Apache project, but have 
never signed an iCLA. There are many more than four people involved.

The Team OpenOffice website must immediately acknowledge that OpenOffice.org is 
a registered trademark of the Apache Software Foundation.

The Team OpenOffice site must recognize the Apache project.

I don't think a joint statement is appropriate without properly respectful 
actions beforehand.

Regards,
Dave


 
 - Shane
 
 
 
 As much as we would like to do an interim release I am
 afraid there are issues that won't make it possible:
 
 - Apache releases have to be approved by the PPMC and
 can only be released under an Apache License.
 - The old OpenOffice.Org made available 3.4 RC, releasing
 3.3.1 would not give the right signal wrt continuity.
 - The ASF, through the PPMC, cannot approve code that it
 hasn't seen and AFAICT Team OOo hasn't been very visible
 here in the community (sorry if I just missed it).
 
 This said, 3.4 is advancing very nicely. I don't want to
 hurry things but I think we are moving in the right
 direction.
 
 Pedro.

Time for the ASF to send an Open Letter?

I have been mulling this over for a long time...

Up to now, we have been reactionary. We have allowed others to
control and distort the message, paint things as a us vs. them
battle (simply to position themselves for personal gain in the
whole debacle), and foster FUD to the clear harm of the ENTIRE
OOo ecosystem.

I think it's time that an Open Letter to the entire Open Office
ecosystem (companies, entities, individuals, etc...) be drafted
that sets the record straight.

And I volunteer to drive this task...

Comments?

Re: Time for the ASF to send an Open Letter?

2011-11-15 Thread Simon Phipps


On 15 Nov 2011, at 09:46, Jim Jagielski wrote:

 I have been mulling this over for a long time...
 
 Up to now, we have been reactionary. We have allowed others to
 control and distort the message, paint things as a us vs. them
 battle (simply to position themselves for personal gain in the
 whole debacle), and foster FUD to the clear harm of the ENTIRE
 OOo ecosystem.
 
 I think it's time that an Open Letter to the entire Open Office
 ecosystem (companies, entities, individuals, etc...) be drafted
 that sets the record straight.
 
 And I volunteer to drive this task...
 
 Comments?


Who are your targets, Jim? Last time ASF issued a statement it was so PC and 
vague that it appeared to attack LibreOffice instead of addressing its intended 
issue.

S.

Re: Time for the ASF to send an Open Letter?

2011-11-15 Thread Rob Weir

On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 12:46 PM, Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com wrote:
 I have been mulling this over for a long time...

 Up to now, we have been reactionary. We have allowed others to
 control and distort the message, paint things as a us vs. them
 battle (simply to position themselves for personal gain in the
 whole debacle), and foster FUD to the clear harm of the ENTIRE
 OOo ecosystem.


Of course, an AOOo release would be the best possible vehicle for
expressing a proactive message.  But until we have that, I could
certainly see the value of having a statement on what we are, what we
believe, what we stand for, etc.  At graduation time we'd draft a
charter for the new TLP.  But today we don't have anything.

 I think it's time that an Open Letter to the entire Open Office
 ecosystem (companies, entities, individuals, etc...) be drafted
 that sets the record straight.


Hmm... maybe we have different things in mind.  I was thinking more of
a manifesto type statement.  We are the Apache OpenOffice podling.
These are the things we believe are important... and then list 10
things and end with, Here's how you can help

That would be proactive, not reactionary.

 And I volunteer to drive this task...


We could work on it collaboratively on the wiki.

 Comments?

Re: Time for the ASF to send an Open Letter?


On Nov 15, 2011, at 1:02 PM, Simon Phipps wrote:
 
 Who are your targets, Jim?

I believe I mentioned them in the original post... In summary:
the entire Open Office ecosystem.

Re: Time for the ASF to send an Open Letter?


On Nov 15, 2011, at 1:03 PM, Rob Weir wrote:

 On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 12:46 PM, Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com wrote:
 I have been mulling this over for a long time...
 
 Up to now, we have been reactionary. We have allowed others to
 control and distort the message, paint things as a us vs. them
 battle (simply to position themselves for personal gain in the
 whole debacle), and foster FUD to the clear harm of the ENTIRE
 OOo ecosystem.
 
 
 Of course, an AOOo release would be the best possible vehicle for
 expressing a proactive message.  But until we have that, I could
 certainly see the value of having a statement on what we are, what we
 believe, what we stand for, etc.  At graduation time we'd draft a
 charter for the new TLP.  But today we don't have anything.
 

Partly, I can see a number of FUDisms to address. Like there are
only 2 main players within the Open Office ecosystem (Apache and
TDF) and that people need to choose between one or the other;
that the various versions compete against each other instead of
complimenting each other; Why the AL is important for such a standard
such as Open Office and ODF; how there is much more potential for
Open Office than as just a end-user MS Office replacement; etc...

Re: Time for the ASF to send an Open Letter?

Jim,
I'd be happy to help draft this and promote it. As you may know, I've
been wanting to send such a letter, anyway, and have independently
been making efforts to communicate to the ecosystems (note plural).

Further, as I was fairly instrumental  in setting many of these up and
certainly in promoting them, I hope my effort would be helpful.

-louis

On 15 November 2011 12:46, Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com wrote:
 I have been mulling this over for a long time...

 Up to now, we have been reactionary. We have allowed others to
 control and distort the message, paint things as a us vs. them
 battle (simply to position themselves for personal gain in the
 whole debacle), and foster FUD to the clear harm of the ENTIRE
 OOo ecosystem.

 I think it's time that an Open Letter to the entire Open Office
 ecosystem (companies, entities, individuals, etc...) be drafted
 that sets the record straight.

 And I volunteer to drive this task...

 Comments?

Re: Time for the ASF to send an Open Letter?

2011-11-15 Thread Christian Grobmeier

On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 7:26 PM, Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com wrote:

 On Nov 15, 2011, at 1:02 PM, Simon Phipps wrote:

 Who are your targets, Jim?

 I believe I mentioned them in the original post... In summary:
 the entire Open Office ecosystem.


I think we must show ooo power by doing something cool - like a
release. This will silent all fud in a second. Not sure if it will
help if just tell people about us. After all, this has already been
done.

I like Robs idea with 10 things which we are working on. But this is
not the same as an open letter.

Anyway, if others are wanting this, I can help with the translation of
this letter into german, as there are many people in the eco system
from germany

Cheers


-- 
http://www.grobmeier.de

Re: Time for the ASF to send an Open Letter?

Hi,

On 15 November 2011 13:31, Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com wrote:
 Partly, I can see a number of FUDisms to address. Like there are
 only 2 main players within the Open Office ecosystem (Apache and
 TDF) and that people need to choose between one or the other;
 that the various versions compete against each other instead of
 complimenting each other; Why the AL is important for such a standard
 such as Open Office and ODF; how there is much more potential for
 Open Office than as just a end-user MS Office replacement; etc…


There are more. I'd like to see us then establish a deadline for this,
as well as, if it is within the protocols of Apache, the group
drafting it (?).

FWIW, OOo had a list, pr@, that drafted such sorts of things, in
addition to the release announcements. It was private in that you
had to be a member of the project to see the work, but it was by no
means secret, as just about anybody could join the project and thus
see the work being done. (We had the normal issues regarding secrecy,
privacy, Foss, and marketing.)

-louis

Re: Time for the ASF to send an Open Letter?


On Nov 15, 2011, at 1:30 PM, Christian Grobmeier wrote:

 On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 7:26 PM, Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com wrote:
 
 On Nov 15, 2011, at 1:02 PM, Simon Phipps wrote:
 
 Who are your targets, Jim?
 
 I believe I mentioned them in the original post... In summary:
 the entire Open Office ecosystem.
 
 
 I think we must show ooo power by doing something cool - like a
 release. This will silent all fud in a second. Not sure if it will
 help if just tell people about us. After all, this has already been
 done.

That is true... A release is very cool, but for those who are
unaware what effort it takes to do so (esp when considering the
state OOo was on), or are using the lack of release as a FUD
point, I still think we need something pre-release.

 
 I like Robs idea with 10 things which we are working on. But this is
 not the same as an open letter.

We can do both ;)

Re: Time for the ASF to send an Open Letter?

2011-11-15 Thread Rob Weir

On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 1:30 PM, Christian Grobmeier
grobme...@gmail.com wrote:
 On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 7:26 PM, Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com wrote:

 On Nov 15, 2011, at 1:02 PM, Simon Phipps wrote:

 Who are your targets, Jim?

 I believe I mentioned them in the original post... In summary:
 the entire Open Office ecosystem.


 I think we must show ooo power by doing something cool - like a
 release. This will silent all fud in a second. Not sure if it will
 help if just tell people about us. After all, this has already been
 done.

 I like Robs idea with 10 things which we are working on. But this is
 not the same as an open letter.


I was thinking something less about project status, and more about
what our worldview/Weltanshauung.

For example, if the following could be expanded to 10 or 12 points
that we agreed are at the core of why we are here:

https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/What+we+believe

-Rob

 Anyway, if others are wanting this, I can help with the translation of
 this letter into german, as there are many people in the eco system
 from germany

 Cheers


 --
 http://www.grobmeier.de

Re: Time for the ASF to send an Open Letter?

2011-11-15 Thread Alexandro Colorado

is always a good idea to have a constant message with the public. also
from a recruiting point of view. i would suggest to highlight the
trully openness of the project and also the engineering tasks that we
are aiming.
i think the community has also grown and is time to start communicate
its character.

On 11/15/11, Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com wrote:
 I have been mulling this over for a long time...

 Up to now, we have been reactionary. We have allowed others to
 control and distort the message, paint things as a us vs. them
 battle (simply to position themselves for personal gain in the
 whole debacle), and foster FUD to the clear harm of the ENTIRE
 OOo ecosystem.

 I think it's time that an Open Letter to the entire Open Office
 ecosystem (companies, entities, individuals, etc...) be drafted
 that sets the record straight.

 And I volunteer to drive this task...

 Comments?



-- 
Alexandro Colorado
OpenOffice.org Español
http://es.openoffice.org

Re: Time for the ASF to send an Open Letter?

2011-11-15 Thread Dave Fisher

Louis,

On Nov 15, 2011, at 10:37 AM, Louis Suárez-Potts wrote:

 Jim,
 I'd be happy to help draft this and promote it. As you may know, I've
 been wanting to send such a letter, anyway, and have independently
 been making efforts to communicate to the ecosystems (note plural).
 
 Further, as I was fairly instrumental  in setting many of these up and
 certainly in promoting them, I hope my effort would be helpful.

As I explore the N-L portions of the OOo website the diversity of and facets to 
this global effort is amazing. You have played a huge role.

I think a summary / taxonomy of the real global ecosystem would be a helpful 
history to have available to AOOo. Is this something you could start on the 
Wiki?

The N-L sites are an area where AOOo is on the cusp of deciding which ones to 
archive until people show up and which ones have volunteers who wish to 
participate.

Regards,
Dave

 
 -louis
 
 On 15 November 2011 12:46, Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com wrote:
 I have been mulling this over for a long time...
 
 Up to now, we have been reactionary. We have allowed others to
 control and distort the message, paint things as a us vs. them
 battle (simply to position themselves for personal gain in the
 whole debacle), and foster FUD to the clear harm of the ENTIRE
 OOo ecosystem.
 
 I think it's time that an Open Letter to the entire Open Office
 ecosystem (companies, entities, individuals, etc...) be drafted
 that sets the record straight.
 
 And I volunteer to drive this task...
 
 Comments?

Re: Time for the ASF to send an Open Letter?

2011-11-15 Thread Alexandro Colorado

great but we need to get more people from NLCs and forums and others involved.

On 11/15/11, Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com wrote:

 On Nov 15, 2011, at 1:02 PM, Simon Phipps wrote:

 Who are your targets, Jim?

 I believe I mentioned them in the original post... In summary:
 the entire Open Office ecosystem.



-- 
Alexandro Colorado
OpenOffice.org Español
http://es.openoffice.org

Re: Time for the ASF to send an Open Letter?

Hi,



On 15 November 2011 14:38, Dave Fisher dave2w...@comcast.net wrote:
 Louis,

 On Nov 15, 2011, at 10:37 AM, Louis Suárez-Potts wrote:

 Jim,
 I'd be happy to help draft this and promote it. As you may know, I've
 been wanting to send such a letter, anyway, and have independently
 been making efforts to communicate to the ecosystems (note plural).

 Further, as I was fairly instrumental  in setting many of these up and
 certainly in promoting them, I hope my effort would be helpful.

 As I explore the N-L portions of the OOo website the diversity of and facets 
 to this global effort is amazing. You have played a huge role.

 I think a summary / taxonomy of the real global ecosystem would be a helpful 
 history to have available to AOOo. Is this something you could start on the 
 Wiki?

Sure; of course, as with any thing like this, my efforts have only
been possible, let alone realized with the collaboration of
others—many others. But I think rather than a history, as such, or
even a chronology, an accounting of what is going on, and evolving,
would be more to the point, with local histories providing the
narrative (e.g., history of OOo in Romania, or efforts to get it going
in Botswana, France, etc.). My interest lies in continuing the
expansion and depth of OOo (now, I'd guess, AOO) development and use.

 The N-L sites are an area where AOOo is on the cusp of deciding which ones to 
 archive until people show up and which ones have volunteers who wish to 
 participate.

That was the idea. But a purposeful failure—as with the build system
that Mathias pointed out as non reproducible except by those of the
Sysyphean persuasion—was established first by Sun and brilliantly so:
the non provision and allocation of resources to education of
developers. It matters little if we have contributors only to find
that we have no easy way to graduate them to developers.

 Regards,
 Dave

Best,
louis


 -louis

 On 15 November 2011 12:46, Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com wrote:
 I have been mulling this over for a long time...

 Up to now, we have been reactionary. We have allowed others to
 control and distort the message, paint things as a us vs. them
 battle (simply to position themselves for personal gain in the
 whole debacle), and foster FUD to the clear harm of the ENTIRE
 OOo ecosystem.

 I think it's time that an Open Letter to the entire Open Office
 ecosystem (companies, entities, individuals, etc...) be drafted
 that sets the record straight.

 And I volunteer to drive this task...

 Comments?

Re: Time for the ASF to send an Open Letter?