[board-discuss] Representation statement
I, Daniel Armando Rodriguez, elected member of the Board of Directors of The Document Foundation, hereby and until further notice, nominate the following deputies to represent me during board calls and meetings, in the order set forth below: 1. Paolo Vecchi -- Daniel Armando Rodriguez, Member of the Board of Directors The Document Foundation, Kurfürstendamm 188, 10707 Berlin, DE Gemeinnützige rechtsfähige Stiftung des bürgerlichen Rechts Legal details: https://www.documentfoundation.org/imprint -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: board-discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/ Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy
Re: [board-discuss] Farewell and thank you to Marina, Björn, Eike, Kendy, Simon and Osvaldo
El 2020-02-18 06:57, Florian Effenberger escribió: Hello, as of today, Marina, Björn, Eike, Kendy, Simon and Osvaldo are leaving the board. I want to thank all of you both personally and on behalf of the community for your work, dedication, passion and your longtime service in the board of The Document Foundation, for all you did and for all your support and service. We've all grown massively in the past years, exciting events and developments took place. TDF will always be a part of your life and you will always be a part of TDF - and I'm sure our paths will cross again! Grazie, danke, děkuji, thank you! Florian As one of the new BoD members I would like to thank and congratulate those who are leaving the BoD for all the work and effort they have put in. Without their commitment and effort we would not be where we are. Thank you all very much. On the other hand, I want you to know that I am very grateful that the community has given me this opportunity, I feel very supported. I will dedicate my time and effort not to let you down as nothing matters to me more than to face this new challenge successfully so that we continue to grow. -- Daniel Armando Rodriguez, Member of the Board of Directors The Document Foundation, Kurfürstendamm 188, 10707 Berlin, DE Gemeinnützige rechtsfähige Stiftung des bürgerlichen Rechts Legal details: https://www.documentfoundation.org/imprint -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: board-discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/ Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy
[board-discuss] LOOL user experience
I'd like to collect experiences on deployment LOOL as it's offered right now and what people think need to be improved. I believe we should know what people expects when downloading a docker img, if it fits the needing or what do they have to deal with. -- Daniel Armando Rodriguez -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: board-discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/ Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy
Re: [board-discuss] LOOL user experience
El 2020-05-22 10:33, Heiko Tietze escribió: On 22.05.20 16:09, Simon Phipps wrote: A survey form would be the best way to go a about it Happy to support this but no idea how to start. Ordinary users cannot answer "What's the best solution for you to get LOOL?" neither "Which kind of authentication do you prefer? [OpenFoo, LibreBar, PublicQux]". And isn't the setup kind of a stack that needs to be installed with (Next)Cloud, LOOL backend, and (COOL)-UI? So what I'd need for a survey is a couple of simple questions that everybody can answer. My preferred type of question is multiple-choice with additional "Other" option. My initial take, * Shall enterprises (and even individuals) can deploy their own LOOL to have a cloud based collaborative office suite? + Yes + No + Other (explain) * Deployment on cloud servers under your control or on-prem should require high-level technical expertise? + Yes + No + Other (explain) The platform should allow the possibility of adding integrations with other software platform? + Yes + No + Other (explain) -- Daniel Armando Rodriguez -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: board-discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/ Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy
Re: [board-discuss] LOOL user experience
El 2020-05-22 10:09, Simon Phipps escribió:
A survey form would be the best way to go about it.
Also note that - regardless of package availability - as conceived
Libreoffice Online is beyond the scope of most individuals as it
requires access to cloud infrastructure, familiarity with certificates
and a willingness to manage web security. That's why I have proposed
LiOn Pi, which is targeted at individuals.
At least a sysadmin would be willing to deal with, but as far as I know
currently is hard enough even for such profiles.
{Terse? Mobile!}
On Fri, 22 May 2020, 14:36 Thorsten Behrens,
wrote:
Hi Daniel, all,
Daniel Armando Rodriguez wrote:
I believe we should know what people expects when downloading a
docker img, if it fits the needing or what do they have to deal
with.
Depends on who's the target audience of that question, I guess.
Possibly the design, or the website list are better places to discuss
this?
Cheers,
-- Thorsten
--
Daniel Armando Rodriguez
--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: board-discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org
Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/
Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy
Re: [board-discuss] LOOL user experience
El 2020-05-22 09:34, Thorsten Behrens escribió: Hi Daniel, all, Daniel Armando Rodriguez wrote: I believe we should know what people expects when downloading a docker img, if it fits the needing or what do they have to deal with. Depends on who's the target audience of that question, I guess. Members, Certified Professionals, sysadmins Possibly the design, or the website list are better places to discuss this? Cheers, -- Thorsten -- Daniel Armando Rodriguez -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: board-discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/ Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy
Re: [board-discuss] LOOL user experience
El 2020-05-22 10:33, Heiko Tietze escribió: On 22.05.20 16:09, Simon Phipps wrote: A survey form would be the best way to go a about it Happy to support this but no idea how to start. Ordinary users cannot answer "What's the best solution for you to get LOOL?" neither "Which kind of authentication do you prefer? [OpenFoo, LibreBar, PublicQux]". And isn't the setup kind of a stack that needs to be installed with (Next)Cloud, LOOL backend, and (COOL)-UI? So what I'd need for a survey is a couple of simple questions that everybody can answer. My preferred type of question is multiple-choice with additional "Other" option. In this case our end user should understood, IMO, be Certified professionals, members or IT responsible people. So, maybe this thread can drop such questions as a result. -- Daniel Armando Rodriguez -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: board-discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/ Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy
Re: [board-discuss] LOOL user experience
El 2020-05-23 16:32, Sam Tuke escribió: On 23/05/2020 19:04, Daniel Armando Rodriguez wrote: * Shall enterprises (and even individuals) can deploy their own LOOL to have a cloud based collaborative office suite? + Yes + No + Other (explain) Rather than asking what people think /should/ happen, it's better to ask them about their past behaviour, because that is a more reliable indicator of their needs. For example (based on questions proposed so far): - Have you edited documents in a web browser within the last month? - Which of the following software deployment systems have you used to succesfully install software? - When was the last time you hired professional help to setup self-hosted software? This approach is common in US product development research. Sam. Thanks for the hints Sam, very good point. Any other ideas? -- Daniel Armando Rodriguez -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: board-discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/ Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy
Re: [board-discuss] MCC questions ..
El 2020-09-04 08:17, Michael Meeks escribió: Hi Andreas, On 03/09/2020 19:59, Andreas Mantke wrote: b) TDF currently has 221 members and none of them asked any question to the candidates! That's something to think long and hard about. What does this mean to the democratic culture of the foundation. It was created to get the members / contributors a voice and a say. Fair enough =) good point - here are a few questions I came up with. Please note - it is trivial to ask more questions in a few minutes than can be answered in a lifetime - but here are a few things I'd love to know from each candidate: What is the right list for that ? board-discuss I hope. * many MC members say they want to expand the membership. Given that LibreOffice is rather static in terms of its number of those involved in development: coding, UX, translation, documentation etc. + how do you plan to gain lots of new contributors ? Don't need to be 'a lot' + Do you think we expand the membership by accpting more marginal contributions for membership cf. https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/TDF/Membership_Role#Contributing What's the 'more marginal contributions' meaning? + what effect do you expect that to have on the project ? * If you've stood before, approximately how many people have you encouraged to apply for membership ? * How many applications have you voted against ? * Do you believe we should have a half-way house / badge between membership and non-membership that encourages a person, and gives the a path via more contribution to achieve full membership ? * When there are no concrete metrics (such as translated strings, code commits, wiki changes, ask comments, etc.) available to decide on a person's contribution; what is best practice for MC members vouching for their friends' contributions, and how should other MC members validate that ? * To what degree should the MC's decisions & discussion be transparent (ie. publicly available) ? Any relation to MC Open Letter? * How do you believe we can improve the existing election system - assuming the statutes can be tweaked ? + I'm interested in where we have the situation that being too popular can stop you being able to engage at all as a deputy - as we saw with Miklos/Jona in the last MC election, and Kendy in the last Board election. 'Too popular'? What about that tiny little issue callled affiliation? -- DAR -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: board-discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/ Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy
Re: [board-discuss] MCC questions ..
First of all, it is a public list. On the other hand, not being a candidate disqualifies me from asking questions? El 2020-09-04 10:47, Simon Phipps escribió: I was not aware you were a candidate, Daniel. Did I miss your nomination? S. On Fri, Sep 4, 2020 at 2:29 PM Daniel Armando Rodriguez wrote: El 2020-09-04 08:17, Michael Meeks escribió: Hi Andreas, On 03/09/2020 19:59, Andreas Mantke wrote: b) TDF currently has 221 members and none of them asked any question to the candidates! That's something to think long and hard about. What does this mean to the democratic culture of the foundation. It was created to get the members / contributors a voice and a say. Fair enough =) good point - here are a few questions I came up with. Please note - it is trivial to ask more questions in a few minutes than can be answered in a lifetime - but here are a few things I'd love to know from each candidate: What is the right list for that ? board-discuss I hope. * many MC members say they want to expand the membership. Given that LibreOffice is rather static in terms of its number of those involved in development: coding, UX, translation, documentation etc. + how do you plan to gain lots of new contributors ? Don't need to be 'a lot' + Do you think we expand the membership by accpting more marginal contributions for membership cf. https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/TDF/Membership_Role#Contributing What's the 'more marginal contributions' meaning? + what effect do you expect that to have on the project ? * If you've stood before, approximately how many people have you encouraged to apply for membership ? * How many applications have you voted against ? * Do you believe we should have a half-way house / badge between membership and non-membership that encourages a person, and gives the a path via more contribution to achieve full membership ? * When there are no concrete metrics (such as translated strings, code commits, wiki changes, ask comments, etc.) available to decide on a person's contribution; what is best practice for MC members vouching for their friends' contributions, and how should other MC members validate that ? * To what degree should the MC's decisions & discussion be transparent (ie. publicly available) ? Any relation to MC Open Letter? * How do you believe we can improve the existing election system - assuming the statutes can be tweaked ? + I'm interested in where we have the situation that being too popular can stop you being able to engage at all as a deputy - as we saw with Miklos/Jona in the last MC election, and Kendy in the last Board election. 'Too popular'? What about that tiny little issue callled affiliation?
Re: [board-discuss] LOOL user experience
El 2020-05-26 09:10, Paolo Vecchi escribió: That's a very good proposal Heiko. Just some amendments: 1.1 (I guess only a few will answer LibreOffice Online as AFAIK isn't that easy to build) Maybe we should also add Collabora Code and Collabora Online? I have several instances with Collabora Code as at present it's the only available on platforms like Univention. Maybe the following sounds better? 2 2 Should enterprises (and even individuals) be able to deploy their own LibreOffice Online to have a self-hosted/cloud based collaborative office suite? Indeed 4 I think lately Richard Stallman has been involved in controversial stuff. Maybe it's safer to use Linus Torvalds to avoid comments? Why not just saying a 'tech guru'. We could also add the following questions to see if individuals would sponsor the project and business users want/need paid for support services? 6 As individual users would you like to make a donation to TDF specifically to support the development of LibreOffice Online? 7 As a business user would you prefer to use the paid for versions of LibreOffice Online delivered and supported by partner organisations? Ciao Paolo On 26/05/2020 14:43, Heiko Tietze wrote: Thanks for the input. The draft for a survey is on Nextcloud https://nextcloud.documentfoundation.org/s/ZCX4wrx3wipr5mQ Framing the questionnaire as input for future development we might get a feeling what percentage of users is interested in LOOL. And hopefully some have experienced success or failed and can reply what's needed for a one-click installation. Cheers, Heiko -- Daniel Armando Rodriguez -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: board-discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/ Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy
Re: [board-discuss] Quarterly TDF 2020 Key Goals update
And the meeting before, it has been promised by the board to inform the community on the status of the 'TDC project', the plan that envisions to deal with products in app stores and possibly tendering and maybe more. That update is to expected very soon. Let me rephrase, [...] the plan that envisioned to deal with products in app stores and raised several concerns within the community. -- Daniel Armando Rodriguez -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: board-discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/ Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy
Re: [board-discuss] LOOL user experience
Agree El 2020-05-26 11:02, Heiko Tietze escribió: Always good to have bike-shedding questions in such a list ;-). First, we have to agree on such a survey including what exactly we want to learn and which questions we have to ask. The proficiency self-estimation is just a way to split answers into more or less experienced people. So back to Stallman/Thorvalds/Musk/Trump, the better option is maybe "I'm a professional system administrator" (whatever we put there, it's clear that this is the maximum option). On 26.05.20 16:52, Paolo Vecchi wrote: On 26/05/2020 16:09, Brett Cornwall wrote: On May 26, 2020 6:10:44 AM PDT, Paolo Vecchi wrote: 4 I think lately Richard Stallman has been involved in controversial stuff. Maybe it's safer to use Linus Torvalds to avoid comments? Further, Stallman is actually not very technically proficient these days and makes for a poor example of a 'God-tier' hacker. :D True. So shall we settle for Linus Torvalds or there are other suggestions? Paolo -- Daniel Armando Rodriguez -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: board-discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/ Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy
Re: [board-discuss] LOOL user experience
El 2020-05-22 11:52, Thorsten Behrens escribió: Hi Heiko, all, Heiko Tietze wrote: So what I'd need for a survey is a couple of simple questions that everybody can answer. My preferred type of question is multiple-choice with additional "Other" option. Thus my (perhaps unintuitive) suggestion to start discussing the details on the design list - Daniel already listed a number of different personas (members, certified professionals, and sysadmins), and it is not unreasonable to assume they might have different needs. The point has to do with the smooth process they/any must find when deploying such a solution. -- Daniel Armando Rodriguez -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: board-discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/ Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy
Re: [board-discuss] LOOL user experience
El 2020-05-22 12:30, Simon Phipps escribió: On Fri, May 22, 2020 at 4:37 PM Daniel Armando Rodriguez wrote: El 2020-05-22 10:33, Heiko Tietze escribió: On 22.05.20 16:09, Simon Phipps wrote: A survey form would be the best way to go a about it Happy to support this but no idea how to start. Ordinary users cannot answer "What's the best solution for you to get LOOL?" neither "Which kind of authentication do you prefer? [OpenFoo, LibreBar, PublicQux]". And isn't the setup kind of a stack that needs to be installed with (Next)Cloud, LOOL backend, and (COOL)-UI? So what I'd need for a survey is a couple of simple questions that everybody can answer. My preferred type of question is multiple-choice with additional "Other" option. In this case our end user should understood, IMO, be Certified professionals, members or IT responsible people. So, maybe this thread can drop such questions as a result. That is not acceptable. We should be serving the public, not a technical elitre. That's a missleading, those profiles can help us to reach the endusers. My personal take is we should get a product as easy to deploy as WordPress, for instance, to let the end user take the control of their own cloud. -- Daniel Armando Rodriguez -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: board-discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/ Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy
Re: [board-discuss] LOOL user experience
El 2020-05-22 14:39, Marco Marinello - Mailing lists escribió: Hi all, in September 2019, to get another project up and running (in which the main component is NextCloud), I found myself working on LibreOffice Online. This was totally a pain. The lack of any consistent documentation (until May 5 in the INSTALL file there was just written "Left as an exercise to the reader") was one of the biggest problems. The only way was to rely on old blog posts found on the internet. Another totally undocumented topic (obviously I refer to the official documentation on wiki.documentfoundation.org) was the configuration of a reverse proxy to work with LOOL, essential since configuring LOOL to use a non-self signed certificate is even harder. I experienced how the community was once helpful (e.g. addressing me to the l10n-docker-nightly and explaining the branches) and once, let's say, less helpful (quote from the IRC "and why do you think we (Collabora) would want to help you in creating a competing product?"). Needless to say, this has left me stunned: certainly if I write to the community I don't expect someone to judge if I'm able to declare a variable in Javascript or not. Since then, however, much has been done: Online now has at least a decent documentation which covers the build of a stable version of the docker container. Many information are though still missing, a reliable evaluation of the resources needed to have a stable instance and how many users it could serve, for example. Clustering LOOL even seems to be an untouched topic for now (to the public, at least). Therefore, I totally endorse Paolo's proposal. TDF should, in my opinion, definitely release working stable binaries of online. Many many associations out there don't have the money or simply don't need a professional support just the same way it happens for the client version. I even agree with Simon: deploying online is horribly hard. I've been working on some Ansible playbook since a while and I think they could be soon released. The aim is to provide sysadmins (even myself) an easy way to deploy LOOL. If we have on the Docker HUB an arm64/amrhf image, having it working on a RaspberryPi would be just a side effect. All the best, Marco Thank you for valuable input Marco What makes my worry is the response you got about C'bora under TDF's IRC And I take you words "an easy way to deploy LOOL" should be provided by TDF, as TDF's mission is to offer a free product to the end user. And that offer should allow a painless implementation. -- Daniel Armando Rodriguez -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: board-discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/ Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy
Re: [board-discuss] LOOL user experience
El 2020-05-22 15:22, Ilmari Lauhakangas escribió: Cor Nouws kirjoitti 22.5.2020 klo 22.15: Hi Marco, Marco Marinello - Mailing lists wrote on 22/05/2020 20:39: Therefore, I totally endorse Paolo's proposal. TDF should, in my opinion, definitely release working stable binaries of online. Many many associations out there don't have the money or simply don't need a professional support just the same way it happens for the client version. Thanks for bringing this forward and good to see a future contributor possibly ;) Marco has already written docs in the wiki for some months: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/BuildingOnline https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Configuring_a_reverse_proxy_for_LOOL Ilmari He has really done a great job, but TDF cannot depend on the goodwill of the members for a product to be implemented. All documentation should be provided to make life a lot easier for everyone. -- Daniel Armando Rodriguez -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: board-discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/ Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy
Re: [board-discuss] LOOL user experience
El 2020-05-22 17:26, Cor Nouws escribió: Hi Daniel, Daniel Armando Rodriguez wrote on 22/05/2020 22:49: What makes my worry is the response you got about C'bora under TDF's IRC It would be good to hear what you think of today's board meeting, and what has been presented there about community health and ecosystem. (Well, we tried to chat later, but kitchen duties were calling me ;) ) What I think is no one can get such answer from TDF channel, period. And I take you words "an easy way to deploy LOOL" should be provided by TDF, as TDF's mission is to offer a free product to the end user. And that offer should allow a painless implementation. That is a reasonable possible way of looking at it, for sure. TDF's mission speaks about "software made available for everyone .. freely and without restrictions". So indeed you can read that as 'binaries for business use without payment', but just as reasonable as 'code for all individuals without restrictions'. Or maybe even interpretations in between :) No one is talking of the first, and I'm reading it over and over again with different wording. So that's the good thing for primary the board, but if needed the whole community: our freedom to look at what is really wise to do for TDF's mission. Maybe the Ecosystem & Sustainability presentation gives some good input to further talk about that aspect of how our world looks. So lets do that :) If TDF offer a product for free, and states the commercial suport is up the ecosystem companies what's the problem? Whoever is looking for such support will knock their doors. -- Daniel Armando Rodriguez -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: board-discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/ Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy
Re: [board-discuss] LOOL user experience
El 2020-05-22 16:05, Andras Timar escribió: Hi, On Fri, May 22, 2020 at 8:40 PM Marco Marinello - Mailing lists wrote: This was totally a pain. The lack of any consistent documentation (until May 5 in the INSTALL file there was just written "Left as an exercise to the reader") was one of the biggest problems. The only way was to rely on old blog posts found on the internet. Until recently the consensus was that TDF releases source tarballs for LOOL. So there was no demand to write documentation how to create packages, how to build a "product". It's not about creating a product but implementing a solution, that's the key. On the other hand it is fully documented in the source code in README files how to build as a developer, if someone wanted to hack on the code. The docker/l10n-docker-nightly.sh is also quite self-explanatory. (For those, who don't know what it is: it builds a docker image from source.) Another totally undocumented topic (obviously I refer to the official documentation on wiki.documentfoundation.org) was the configuration of a reverse proxy to work with LOOL, essential since configuring LOOL to use a non-self signed certificate is even harder. As TDF did not release binaries, I don't know who would look for such documentation in TDF wiki. Collabora published documentation for CODE, e.g.: https://www.collaboraoffice.com/code/apache-reverse-proxy/ https://www.collaboraoffice.com/code/nginx-reverse-proxy/ But there are other good sources of information, too, from integrators. From the community you may want to make implementations that, for example, do not show warnings. If the implementer is willing to deal with that, why not let them? Another hot topic, for me at least is to provide vendor neutral information. I even agree with Simon: deploying online is horribly hard. I've been I disagree. It's a myth. Yes, it can be hard, when firewalls, load balancers, 5 users etc. are involved. It's the case when one needs professional support. But for the hobbyist, how hard is it to install CODE with a few clicks in Univention, or to follow my "5 minute" guides? https://www.collaboraoffice.com/code/quick-tryout-owncloud-docker/ https://www.collaboraoffice.com/code/quick-tryout-nextcloud-docker/ Vendor neutral point applies here too. And I am aware that without C'bora/CIB there would probably be no LOOL, but we are TDF. -- Daniel Armando Rodriguez -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: board-discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/ Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy
Re: [board-discuss] Initiative to improve communication channels
El 2020-07-18 12:01, Telesto escribió: Decidim allows to enrich spaces for participation through multiple available components (surveys, proposals, follow-up of results, comments and several more). -> True; as - I think I said - no experience with all participation tools.. Did try decidim quickly today. I personally find https://try.decidim.org not utmost attractive visually (not judging the functionality, capability's or scale ability). Another part is a full fetched participation environment really needed. Or is it rather overblown functionality nobody actually gonna use. The number of active commenting users isn't extremely large; and the number responding here even lower. Even polls at https://planet.documentfoundation.org/ attract representative amount of users. I happy already with kind of comment board showing depth (so responds too) and a moderation score (the moderation can be done by anyone logged in at the site). Gray means Off-topic / irrelevant; +3 Spotlight. In addition can a vote be added; to support/unsupported. And maybe a poll functionality Are more options actually needed? I'm would be quite happy with forum/ bulletin board with decent comment functionality and possibly to support a comment and/or prioritizing comments. This e-mail message board is not my type of thing. Unstructured, hard to go through. Bug tracker message system is already a lot better. And a message board with comments (which easily show who is responding to what and being able to filter based on votes and or moderation score) is perfect already. The 'voting'/ supporting should be enough for non fluent people, I think. And message board maybe even be translated too by some automatic translation site. Quality is often quite acceptable. Visa versa people could use a translation side to write their opinion in native language, while being automatically translated to English with some 'heading: automatic translation" and the source text below. That's what I do if there is a posting of a bug in Spanish/French/German. And it could environment could be used also on blog.documentfoundation.org. As I'm talking about message board with same functionality (except slightly improved comment system). So to backend or the whole site could shared. Without bloating everything with again a new environment for participation. Including maintaining (security updates/ configuration)/ moderating etc. And all the comments can also send as e-mail message to the e-mail archive if people like nabble/mailings. Fair enough, In my opinion, one cannot always depend on translation tools to say something. I usually use them, but many times it is necessary to make adjustments to bring the translated text closer to what you really want to say. The case of translating text is different, since even if it is not the best result, the idea can be understood. But that's just my opinion. In addition, I believe that a full participatory environment is necessary. In principle, because it concentrates different tools on a single platform. Regarding the mentions about updates and maintenance, I have already expressed my willingness to add my collaboration if necessary. I also believe that when everyone can feel the benefits of such a platform many people will welcome it. -- DAR -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: board-discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/ Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy
Re: [libreoffice-website] Re: [board-discuss] Initiative to improve communication channels
El 2020-07-09 06:05, Ilmari Lauhakangas escribió: Thorsten Behrens kirjoitti 9.7.2020 klo 11.44: Ilmari Lauhakangas wrote: DemocracyOS vs. anything we currently have is an apples to oranges comparison meaning we *can't* shut anything down. But how would DemocracyOS then help to solve the too-many-channels problem? In my view it would not help solve that specific problem. I guess the idea was instead to have a channel geared towards a very specific purpose (feedback to TDF governance) with an interface that would be pleasant for the majority. Ilmari did the reading I was aiming at. One example, spanish ML has 329 subscribers so far. Takign just the 1% of the spanish speaking people worldwide, which is about 500 millions, that number is not even insignificant. That's the main reason that motivates me, to bring new users closer through a channel more in tune with the current times and, therefore, something that most computer users are used to. -- DAR -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: board-discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/ Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy
[board-discuss] Initiative to improve communication channels
In my opinion, and based on recent experience, I consider it necessary for TDF to be open to community participation in a more modern and accessible way to everyone. In this sense, it is clear that the use of mailing lists, IRC/Telegram channels does not allow to reach the majority of LibreOffice users, free software advocates and community members and that is why I would like to propose the adoption of a platform that favours participation, debate, interaction and collaborative elaboration of lines of action between TDF and the community. In this sense, the ticket https://redmine.documentfoundation.org/issues/3251 has been created in the interest to present alternatives to reach the proposed goal and get feedback from the community about the topic. Everyone is invited to participate. -- Daniel Armando Rodriguez, Member of the Board of Directors The Document Foundation, Kurfürstendamm 188, 10707 Berlin, DE Gemeinnützige rechtsfähige Stiftung des bürgerlichen Rechts Legal details: https://www.documentfoundation.org/imprint -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: board-discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/ Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy
Re: [board-discuss] Re: [tdf-members] Personal: and software freedom.
El 2020-07-13 13:29, Kev M escribió: K, this is the amazing thing about Vanilla. It's actually black. Well, it's actually more ochre-ish. Also, I get Olvier's point about it being too cartoonish to use Vanilla; but I retort: Google uses candybar names for it's versions of Android. Debian uses Toy Story characters. I could find many more examples where software has a "cartoonish" name. The nice thing about Vanilla is that everyone implicity knows what it means; plain, but it doesn't sound boring like plain, and Vanilla can be Vanilla, like the ice-cream, or Vanilla the substance, which again, is black. I second Olivier here, not everyone knows outside the geek circle. -- DAR -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: board-discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/ Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy
[board-discuss] Filling the gap
At the moment we could say that we have divided positions, change the label and continue with the schedule and, on the other hand, continue the discussion and postpone the implementation until 7.1. So, in order to bring positions closer together, why not postpone the release and continue with the discussion for a couple more weeks? -- Daniel Armando Rodriguez, Member of the Board of Directors The Document Foundation, Kurfürstendamm 188, 10707 Berlin, DE Gemeinnützige rechtsfähige Stiftung des bürgerlichen Rechts Legal details: https://www.documentfoundation.org/imprint -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: board-discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/ Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy
Re: [board-discuss] Discussion about options available with marketing plan draft and timetable
, convince them, make things clear to them, because the project can only survive if there is sufficient funding, and the ecosystem is one of several key parameters for the success of TDF - we wouldn't be where we are without all of you, all of the community. I find it much easier to celebrate things with a positive message than with a negative. As such, I seriously doubt we will convince people and bring across a good message if we communicate with too strong words. Positive wording and directions are always better than negative. And I think it's also much easier for the community to communicate that. Maybe we tried with messaging that was not successful so far, fair enough, so let's improve the message, but I would like to work on a positive framing, than on a negative one. TDF is no different in this regard! We ourselves, we use lots of free software as an organization - be it for web, database, file services, mail, chat, conferencing and other servers. We have the skills in-house and we often rely on pre-compiled binaries from free software projects. We do contribute back e.g. by supporting upstream development, doing advocacy and working together on a common goal. We don’t do this because of strong taglines and texts, but because we’re convinced of doing something good to the benefit of many, making improvements for us and others, achieving a common goal. Contributing and being a "good citizen" can be done in various ways. It’s this message I would like to transport also for LibreOffice. In the end, I trust the marketing team, I trust the board, I trust the community - and I’m sure our collective wisdom will bring up what is best for the project. I know constructive discussions in public are not trivial and can be really demanding, especially on such an obviously emotional topic. Part of the positive progress we do make is also exactly this discussion - working together constructively, positively and creating things is what will set, literally, the foundation for the next decade of our Foundation, and everyone who is part of the ecosystem around it. Florian -- Daniel Armando Rodriguez, Member of the Board of Directors The Document Foundation, Kurfürstendamm 188, 10707 Berlin, DE Gemeinnützige rechtsfähige Stiftung des bürgerlichen Rechts Legal details: https://www.documentfoundation.org/imprint -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: board-discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/ Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy
Re: [board-discuss] Involvement of the board in the Marketing Plan
Hi, I was at the meeting too. Given the importance of adopting a medium-term plan such as the one under discussion, in my role as a Board Member I recognize that it is extremely important to hear different voices. In fact, I would have liked yesterday's meeting to have been attended by more than 11 people. In this regard, I believe that greater emphasis could have been placed on the dissemination of such activity. However, in relation to the latter, language should not be a barrier for anyone. We are not all native English speakers in fact and it is important to stress that TDF has usual channels of communication to keep up with the news or participate. El 2020-06-26 12:32, Sam Tuke escribió: Hi All, thanks to yesterday's marketing call, marketing team members had an opportunity to discuss the 5 year Marketing plan currently being drafted by Italo. It seems like only one member of the current Board of Directors was present in that meeting (though there may have been some who stayed silent; please correct me). A 5 year marketing plan, on the 10th anniversary of a project, will be a great step forward, and a critical piece of strategy for the future of the organisation. No doubt the Board has been deeply involved in putting the drafts together. I appreciate this has taken considerable energy. Nevertheless, the absence of more Board representatives in the Marketing meeting, which may be the only meeting of the marketing team about the plan before it's adopted, raises some interesting questions for we marketers: - If the Board's involvement was already completed privately, to what extent is the marketing team intended to participate in its drafting? - If the Board's involvement is ongoing, then how do they intend to interact with the marketing team? With one representative in a single meeting? - If TDF Marketing staff are intended to be the messengers between Board and marketing team, what is the intended process or workflow of that? If input into the plan from the marketing team is desirable to the Board, then we as marketing team members need a clearer understanding of how that should be provided. I do not take it for granted that this information was shared with the team prior to adoption (though to gain support from the team it seems like a sensible move). But coordinating such a plan as this between Board, staff, and voluntary team takes more than passing on a largely inflexible document to a team of experts towards the end of the process. Product Managers call it "throwing it over the wall" when opportunities for meaningful input ended before handover. The strain on this coordination is plainly visible in the plan itself, on the "preface" slides explaining eg the LibreOffice Online situation. It's a problem when a staff member is forced to hint that some topics are out of bounds in this way because they are stuck between "a rock and hard place" and must resort to such things to discourage input on controversial issues which can have no effect. This is a question of leadership for the board, not for TDF staff in my view, as it is fundamentally a question of how much control over the marketing plan should be given to the marketing team, and what parts it is desirable for them to contribute to, and how that should be communicated to them. This is a matter of the social contract between the Foundation and volunteers -- not just marketing. There are many options here, to suit the Board's needs, and doing things differently need not make finding consensus on already hard topics, more difficult. The current draft plan is broad in scope, covering community management, branding, and touching on ecosystem design. Tough topics could be split into other sections, or strategy documents if necessary, freeing the marketing team with more room to influence the narrower, purely marketing topics which remain. With some brainstorming or reference to other Open Source projects, additional means of cooperating with the team could no doubt be found. Sam. -- Daniel Armando Rodriguez -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: board-discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/ Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy
Re: [board-discuss] Initiative to improve communication channels
As stated at the meeting, the number of subscribers to the mailing lists is significantly low. The user list, for example, has about 1500 subscribers, the Spanish and Brazilian lists have about 350 people each. TDF has today 221 members and this list only 160 people. Therefore, beyond the fact that the subscription is voluntary, it cannot be said that many people are encouraged to participate in the discussions. It has to do with a social issue, as someone said, but also with the language barrier and the ability to argue an idea. And I'm pretty sure that providing a platform where people can vote on comments/ideas will allow TDF to attract much more participation, even from those who don't speak English as fluently... as I do. To make it clear, this is not an attempt to solve several problems at once, I don't expect to present a final solution, if there is one. But as a foundation with a global reach we need to make people willing to participate. If such behavior modification is achieved through technical change, then we welcome it. What I propose is to give the platform a chance without leaving any other tools aside, for a certain period of time, and then evaluate the performance. -- Daniel Armando Rodriguez, Member of the Board of Directors The Document Foundation, Kurfürstendamm 188, 10707 Berlin, DE Gemeinnützige rechtsfähige Stiftung des bürgerlichen Rechts Legal details: https://www.documentfoundation.org/imprint -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: board-discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/ Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy
Re: [board-discuss] Initiative to improve communication channels
El 2020-07-17 11:42, Cor Nouws escribió: Hi Daniel, *, Daniel Armando Rodriguez wrote on 17/07/2020 15:11: As stated at the meeting, the number of subscribers to the mailing lists is significantly low. The user list, for example, has about 1500 subscribers, the Spanish and Brazilian lists have about 350 people each. TDF has today 221 members and this list only 160 people. Therefore, beyond the fact that the subscription is voluntary, it cannot be said that many people are encouraged to participate in the discussions. It is indeed right that mailing lists are not for _all_ - any more. /me those were good times ;) It has to do with a social issue, as someone said, but also with the language barrier and the ability to argue an idea. And I'm pretty sure that providing a platform where people can vote on comments/ideas will allow TDF to attract much more participation, even from those who don't speak English as fluently... as I do. Of course it is not needed to get votes in the first place, but allowing people to provide input, without the need to set up an email address for that, is indeed important. To make it clear, this is not an attempt to solve several problems at once, I don't expect to present a final solution, if there is one. But I heard a likewise comment in the BoD meeting indeed, and could not well understand it myself. Maybe the idea was to express that the problem is a complex one, and not only solved by different tooling. Maybe the tooling even is less important than an attitude that encourages participation. I remember quite some moments from the past, that on a mailing lists, in a discussion, or at the start of it, it was recognized that we should try to use more public lists for the kind of topics.. Sometimes that worked. But to often, with the load of work, difficulty to manage, moderate (more widely) discussions etc. we fell in old habits.. ;) as a foundation with a global reach we need to make people willing to participate. If such behavior modification is achieved through technical change, then we welcome it. Indeed. Technical means can help. If a mailing list was available for all, one could say that it would be sufficient to announce on all channels that discussion.topic is ongoing there to encourage people to join - if they so wish. And of course that applies to any preferred tool: make sure that people in other channels get a ping to make them aware. Once implemented, of course an invitation will send through all the channels to let people give it a try. I'm thinking in a blog post also. What I propose is to give the platform a chance without leaving any other tools aside, for a certain period of time, and then evaluate the performance. I did not look into details of https://democraciaos.org/en/ Well, unfortunately DemocracyOS is currently without maintenance. So the preferred choice is decidim, which is a most complete and powerfull tool. But I have a high trust in open source and tooling developed to support democracy. So, with only the condition that it allows to have (some) interaction with mail (and I guess it has), I'm much in favor to give it a try! Indeed, notifications are send through email Maybe with a few projects, topics to start with - not do a complete remake of our work immediately - it yields good experience. Of course And imagine it makes it even easier to improve our attitudes at the same time :) -- DAR -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: board-discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/ Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy
Re: [libreoffice-website] Re: [board-discuss] Initiative to improve communication channels
El 2020-07-17 11:12, Thorsten Behrens escribió: Hi Franklin, all, Franklin Weng wrote: BTW, even if it becomes 15th useless channel, which can be tweaked, tried and improved from the running experiences, it will not be a big deal IMO. Sure, it would create more silos & further fracture the community. As I said during the board call - this is lovely technology, that I can imagine we can put to good use, for some areas. But it doesn't solve the 'too many channels' problem (as it was advertised to do). Let's not fool ourselves. Unless we're willing to shut down mailing lists & telegram channels, and actively shepherd community members over. We have to show the community the usefulness of the platform. We can't make use mandatory, that doesn't work. I already commented on the numbers related to the number of subscribers that have some mailing lists, and such numbers are not representative of the whole community IMO. -- DAR -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: board-discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/ Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy
Re: [board-discuss] Initiative to improve communication channels
El 2020-07-17 15:02, Sophie escribió: Le 17 juillet 2020 19:32:11 GMT+02:00, Simon Phipps a écrit : On Fri, Jul 17, 2020 at 6:19 PM Daniel Armando Rodriguez < drodrig...@documentfoundation.org> wrote: El 2020-07-17 13:20, Simon Phipps escribió: > There is also CONSUL, which was developed as open source by Madrid City > Council, transferred to an independent Foundation and is now used > worldwide. Italo Vignoli is a member of their Board of Directors. See > https://consulproject.org/en/ > > All the same, I don't think it's necessarily a good thing to bring > thousands of voters into a decision making process where they have no > responsibilities to moderate their exercise of rights. It will just > become factional and partisan based on external agendas. I believe that it is crucially important to allow as many voices as possible to be heard, and the consequent monitoring process is greatly facilitated by the implementation of a tool such as Decidim so, together BoD & Community can decide about the issues that matter to us. Please don't confuse "making voices heard", which is generally good, with "offering them a vote", which is generally problematic if they do not carry any responsibilities upon which their votes might rely and especially if they are willing to vote for ideas they don't fully understand on the basis only of personality or identity. Decisions made in that way have bad outcomes. This is not about offering to vote (wich can be disabled in Decidim which I know better than other tools) but about providing a support to a comment. It's very different because that allows people not fluent in English to give an educated opinion and partipate. It's easy when you're fluent to express yourself, and it takes hours to one who is not, most of the time he will abandon before. +100 :-D -- DAR -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: board-discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/ Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy
Re: [board-discuss] Initiative to improve communication channels
El 2020-07-17 15:05, Michael Meeks escribió: On 17/07/2020 18:52, Daniel Armando Rodriguez wrote: Well, misunderstanding of ideas can be avoided simply by communicating in such a way that no aspect is taken for granted when making the request for feedback. I have no problem with tools to get polls / feedback from our userbase; that's great =) Of course, for decisions - we are a meritocracy^W doers-decide project; so having some separate means for the members to easily inform the board / discuss and/or give their input / views on things would also be extremely valuable. Hopefully some clear separation would make membership - and more importantly the contribution necessary to achieve it more attractive to people too (perhaps). My 2 cents, Well, the membership base is small enough (221 to date) to condition feedback to that group only. Ideas can add up, grow and take shape with a wider audience. That is the spirit behind the initiative. -- DAR -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: board-discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/ Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy
Re: [board-discuss] Initiative to improve communication channels
El 2020-07-17 13:20, Simon Phipps escribió: On Fri, Jul 17, 2020 at 5:03 PM Kev M wrote: There are other participatory democracy software out there that exist but I don't know many that are Open Source. There is also CONSUL, which was developed as open source by Madrid City Council, transferred to an independent Foundation and is now used worldwide. Italo Vignoli is a member of their Board of Directors. See https://consulproject.org/en/ All the same, I don't think it's necessarily a good thing to bring thousands of voters into a decision making process where they have no responsibilities to moderate their exercise of rights. It will just become factional and partisan based on external agendas. I believe that it is crucially important to allow as many voices as possible to be heard, and the consequent monitoring process is greatly facilitated by the implementation of a tool such as Decidim so, together BoD & Community can decide about the issues that matter to us. -- DAR -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: board-discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/ Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy
Re: [board-discuss] Initiative to improve communication channels
El 2020-07-17 14:32, Simon Phipps escribió: On Fri, Jul 17, 2020 at 6:19 PM Daniel Armando Rodriguez wrote: El 2020-07-17 13:20, Simon Phipps escribió: There is also CONSUL, which was developed as open source by Madrid City Council, transferred to an independent Foundation and is now used worldwide. Italo Vignoli is a member of their Board of Directors. See https://consulproject.org/en/ All the same, I don't think it's necessarily a good thing to bring thousands of voters into a decision making process where they have no responsibilities to moderate their exercise of rights. It will just become factional and partisan based on external agendas. I believe that it is crucially important to allow as many voices as possible to be heard, and the consequent monitoring process is greatly facilitated by the implementation of a tool such as Decidim so, together BoD & Community can decide about the issues that matter to us. Please don't confuse "making voices heard", which is generally good, with "offering them a vote", which is generally problematic if they do not carry any responsibilities upon which their votes might rely and especially if they are willing to vote for ideas they don't fully understand on the basis only of personality or identity. Decisions made in that way have bad outcomes. Well, misunderstanding of ideas can be avoided simply by communicating in such a way that no aspect is taken for granted when making the request for feedback. -- DAR -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: board-discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/ Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy
Re: [board-discuss] Initiative to improve communication channels
El 2020-07-17 15:35, Telesto escribió: Please don't confuse "making voices heard", which is generally good, with "offering them a vote", which is generally problematic if they do not carry any responsibilities upon which their votes might rely and especially if they are willing to vote for ideas they don't fully understand on the basis only of personality or identity. Decisions made in that way have bad outcomes. +1 for the above Sometimes I think, don't make it to to complex. The intention is completely the opposite As there number of people contributing to the discussion oversee able. So maybe some kind of news article/news board of system; An introduction article [Starting point] + comment system like this (not sure how it's called); https://tweakers.net/reviews/7694/last/android-11-kleine-verfijningen-zonder-zoete-verrassingen.html#reacties. The starting point can be created by anybody registered. The response and the voting makes it easier to keep track of important input (read-up) and what people support or not. For tapping into the general public I would prefer a a polling system. Some background story [XXX] What do you think about Community Edition. Great Idea! Not so, because.. [44 characters or maybe few more to keep it short]. If the want to give more input they should go you can go to www.. Decidim allows to enrich spaces for participation through multiple available components (surveys, proposals, follow-up of results, comments and several more). The ultimately decision should me made at the board. The community tools intended to gather input (and should communicated this way). As Sophi said, "this is not about offering to vote (which can be disabled in Decidim) but about providing a support to a comment. It's very different because that allows people not fluent in English to give an educated opinion and partipate. It's easy when you're fluent to express yourself, and it takes hours to one who is not, most of the time he will abandon before." -- DAR -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: board-discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/ Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy
Re: [board-discuss] [VOTE] LibreOffice 7.1 tag ("label")
El 2020-12-07 12:28, Lothar K. Becker escribió:
As announced in the previous mail, as follow-up to the marketing plan,
the board ALSO has to decide on a concrete TAG ("Label") for
LibreOffice 7.1.
Find the SLIDES with the THREE PROPOSED TAGS at
https://nextcloud.documentfoundation.org/s/sTKeS4NipJ6X9XH
which are from the discussion with our members, and also contain
related information on their strengths and weaknesses, provided by the
marketing team.
The proposals, in ALPHABETICAL order, are as follows:
a. Advance
b. Community
c. Rolling
Vote text and procedures:
- Please VOTE with a clear RANKING for the three TAG ("label")
proposals.
No double ranks are allowed. Each ranking can be assigned just once.
3 is the HIGHEST ranking (your most favorite tag), 1 is the LOWEST
ranking (your least favorite tag).
The winner will be the tag ranked best, i.e. with the highest overall
number.
We use the ranking to come to a quick and effective decision this week.
Notes on the vote:
- This vote is NOT about possible TRANSLATIONS.
Details of that is to be decided by the local communities together with
the marketing project.
If no appropriate translation is found, the original term in English
will be taken.
- This vote is NOT about the ABOUT BOX TEXT.
This will be decided after the tag is chosen.
I now ask ALL the board members to RANK.
The ranking will CLOSE
Thursday, December 10, 1800 Berlin time
--
Lothar K. Becker, Member of the Board of Directors
The Document Foundation, Kurfürstendamm 188, 10707 Berlin, DE
Gemeinnützige rechtsfähige Stiftung des bürgerlichen Rechts
Legal details: https://www.documentfoundation.org/imprint
mail: lot...@documentfoundation.org
phone: +49 7202 9499 001 (c/o .riess applications gmbh)
This is my ranking
3. Community
2. Advance
1. Rolling
I just want to mention that we need this type of consultation to receive
more participation from the members of the foundation. I encourage
everyone to voice their opinion when the opportunity arises, while
thanking those who shared their ideas.
Regards
--
DAR
Re: [board-discuss] [VOTE] LibreOffice 7.1 marketing plan
El 2020-12-07 12:23, Lothar K. Becker escribió:
Find the SLIDES for this vote at
https://nextcloud.documentfoundation.org/s/Z6Y2YeDKHoRW3s8
which are a subset of the initially shared PDF, that was made available
via Nextcloud. Removed from the aforementioned initially shared PDF are
the following slides, that are irrelevant for the vote: slides 2,
10-14, 20-26, 36, 50-53, 62-64, 84
In the here shared PDF with the subset, slides 30, 36, 55 and 60 are
updated to reflect the version number change from 7.0 to 7.1 (in red
color).
Vote text:
- APPROVAL of the 7.1 MARKETING PLAN, especially the ACTION ITEMS from
the aforementioned shared slides slide 27 onwards.
- The board ASKS THE TEAM, especially the marketing group with Italo
and Mike, to WORK on the aforementioned ACTION ITEMS, as they are set
forth in the PDF.
- The board ASKS THE TEAM, especially the marketing group with Italo
and Mike, to MONITOR results and RECEPTION of this marketing plan and
its action items, and COLLECT AND BRING FORWARD PROPOSALS FOR CHANGES,
REMOVALS AND ADDITIONS when necessary, especially in time for the NEXT
MAJOR RELEASES and/or snapshots, or the LATEST IN SIX MONTHS' TIME
Notes on the vote:
- The vote on the TAG ("Label") will be sent in a separate e-mail after
this. It is marked as "TBD" (to be determined) in the slide deck.
I now ask ALL the board members to VOTE with APPROVAL (+1), DISAPPROVAL
(-1) or ABSTAIN (0).
The vote will CLOSE
Thursday, December 10, 1800 Berlin time
Thanks to everyone for your work on the marketing plan and your
commitment to making it a success.
--
Lothar K. Becker, Member of the Board of Directors
The Document Foundation, Kurfürstendamm 188, 10707 Berlin, DE
Gemeinnützige rechtsfähige Stiftung des bürgerlichen Rechts
Legal details: https://www.documentfoundation.org/imprint
mail: lot...@documentfoundation.org
phone: +49 7202 9499 001 (c/o .riess applications gmbh)
My vote is APPROVAL (+1) to the Marketing Plan
I think it is necessary to thank everyone for their work on this,
although I insist that we need this type of consultation to receive more
participation from the members of the foundation. I encourage everyone,
once again, to express their opinion when the opportunity arises.
However, this is a significant step forward in finding balances and
compromises to work with the ecosystem for a bright future. Both
commercial and volunteer contributors do valuable work.
--
DAR
Re: [board-discuss] [VOTE] LibreOffice Online freeze-related topics
El 2021-01-13 12:28, Florian Effenberger escribió: Hello, as discussed in the previous board call, there are some pending decisions to be made wrt. the temporary LibreOffice Online freeze. Here's a set of VOTES (for the board) based on the previous discussions. You may vote on each item individually, or in bulk. For DISCUSSIONS around this (for anyone), please open a separate DISCUSS thread. 1. Ask the marketing project to make a proposal to revamp the LibreOffice Online website (https://www.libreoffice.org/download/libreoffice-online/) to reflect the status quo 2. Ask the team to keep an eye on BugZilla, and freeze/make read-only the BugZilla component for LibreOffice Online, should that be necessary (to avoid new bugs being filed, but do not delete existing content) 3. Point the OpenGrok repository to the mirrored Collabora Online repository, for the time being, as long as the development is not happening at TDF 4. Adapt the Dashboard for the Online repository and freeze contributions in the state immediately preceding the fork 5. Ask the team to remove the Online section from the release notes in the wiki -1 -- DAR -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: board-discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/ Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy
Re: [board-discuss] [DISCUSS] LibreOffice Online freeze-related topics
El 2021-01-13 13:25, Guilhem Moulin escribió:
Hi,
On Wed, 13 Jan 2021 at 16:28:06 +0100, Florian Effenberger wrote:
3. Point the OpenGrok repository to the mirrored Collabora Online
repository, for the time being, as long as the development is not
happening at TDF
It might be helpful to have usage metrics for {OpenGrok online. During
the past 2 weeks I count 535 hits from 30 distinct IPs, half of which
with ≤15 requests. In comparison, for core I count 27k hits from 419
distinct IPs, 284 of which with ≤15 requests.
Anyway, why should TDF assist with tooling for a project that's no
longer developed under its umbrella? IMHO {OpenGrok falls into the
same
category as build bots, and {OpenGrok's online repository should be
removed just like we shutdown the online build bot. And if there is
interest in keeping these around, they should point to the state prior
to the fork, not to a new upstream.
Guilhem has a solid point here, if anyone leaves our project why should
us go behind them?
Bugzilla, the dashboard, and weblate are different and I think it's
important for posterity to preserve (keep that public) issues, metrics,
and l10n contributions of the project from its inception up to the
fork.
FWIW I also think it's wrong to mirror references of
https://git.libreoffice.org/online
from an external repository.
https://listarchives.tdf.io/i/gVuesWC6ZI0MUequqiqJ3nrc
reads “1. to freeze (not delete) the "online" repository at TDF's git,
for the time being” and “1b. to switch the
https://github.com/libreoffice/online
mirror to instead mirror the Collabora repo”. I assume “freeze” in 1.
was
not meant to turn https://git.libreoffice.org/online it into a
read-only
mirror? That's anyway not how I read the decision.
--
DAR
--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: board-discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org
Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/
Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy
[board-discuss] [VOTE] LibreOffice Online freeze-related decisions
Hi, I think it's pretty clear that several BoD members, me included, have misunderstood the implication of such vote. Especially 1b. So, my take is to vote on Guilhems proposal, detailed bellow. Which I support. "rewind branches on https://git.libreoffice.org/online and for the time being deny all write operations to the repository, be it on the git or gerrit side. It'll freeze the state of the dashboard, notification, and other clones for free, and if/when we decide to accept contributions again everything will be just one switch away." -- DAR -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: board-discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/ Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy
Re: [board-discuss] [VOTE] LibreOffice Online freeze-related decisions
El 2021-02-05 10:26, Emiliano Vavassori escribió: Il 02/02/21 18:10, Daniel Armando Rodriguez ha scritto: Hi, I think it's pretty clear that several BoD members, me included, have misunderstood the implication of such vote. Especially 1b. So, my take is to vote on Guilhems proposal, detailed bellow. Which I support. "rewind branches on https://git.libreoffice.org/online and for the time being deny all write operations to the repository, be it on the git or gerrit side. It'll freeze the state of the dashboard, notification, and other clones for free, and if/when we decide to accept contributions again everything will be just one switch away." +1, but I think the proposal misses some bits. I'll try to cope with them: * branches will be rewinded to commit (or the commits before) 4ca4fd34169dd386c2fa57bd28650c00b23d6864 (last commit before changes by Collabora) * OpenGrok needs to point to the TDF git/gerrit * revert decision 1b and (if feasible) point TDF repo on GitHub on git/gerrit on TDF infra. After this bits, I think this whole votes needs another round of confirmation - to be sure that also these bits are consensual. Cheers, Yes, obviously the flood of messages that arrive in the inbox makes it difficult to follow the thread of all the conversations. Also, Guilhem's proposal is splitted into a couple o messages. However, in the spirit of making progress on this issue and avoiding further delays, I think we could consider the vote as inclusive of what Emiliano mentions. If the above is not shared by fellow Board members I will conduct another round of voting, or perhaps we can close with a +1 to the amendment mentioned by Emiliano. With which, by the way, I agree. -- DAR -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: board-discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/ Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy
