Jonathon Blake wrote:
GRS wrote:
you sent them to the wrong place; hence the rejection.
If they were sent to the wrong place then that is because the
documentation said to submit them to the wrong place.
If you have documents and will release them under PDL then make a task issu
Jonathon Blake wrote:
GRS wrote:
made one to documentation except on ooauthors.
a)My other contributions have thus far been apparently rejected ---
with _no_ explanation as to why.
If you sent something to me directly, when was it rejected? I am sorry
if I missed it. When was i
Jonathon Blake wrote:
Charles wrote:
documentation project will soon release an HOW TO that will explain everything
there is to know about the OOo documentation work.
Only about five years to late.
:-) Better late than never.
xan
jonathon
--
Scott Carr
OpenOffice.org
Peter Kupfer OOo wrote:
G. Roderick Singleton wrote:
As an outside group, OOoAuthors is free to use whatever license it
likes. I have no problem with that. Just that items from OOoAuthors must
be non-editable to be included on http://documentation.openoffice.org/
This is certainly in keeping w
you miss one *important* fact here.
And you miss the whole idea which is that there are ways to contribute
to projects that may not be compatible and people should just accept
that because people have various ways to express their creativity.
Life is a forked project as soon as you have chil
Hi,
That already exists for the application itself:
OOo for Mac and NeoOffice (_only_ for Mac)
NeoOffice removes all the X11 dependancies and publishes all the
modifications under GPL, which means the OOo Mac porting team can't
use them.
The result is we have a Mac OOo community split betw
And furthermore .. I don't think it's a good idea to have two lines of
documentation, that could not be mixed because of licensing issues.
This *must* lead to discussion that we are not "one" community :-(
That already exists for the application itself:
OOo for Mac and NeoOffice (_only_ for Mac
Hi Jean,
Jean Hollis Weber wrote:
No, I was not saying or suggesting that. I've got a bit lost in this
thread... were you or someone asking earlier if the specific situation
of the OOoAuthors choice of license had been discussed at CC?
It was a mail by Jonathon Blake who said, that Daniel
On Mon, 2005-07-18 at 20:14 -0500, Peter Kupfer OOo wrote:
> G. Roderick Singleton wrote:
> > On Mon, 2005-07-18 at 13:14 -0500, Peter Kupfer OOo wrote:
> >
> >>G. Roderick Singleton wrote:
> >>>SO if you want to complain about progress or lack thereof at the doc
> >>>project or any of the NL proj
On Mon, 2005-07-18 at 20:15 -0500, Peter Kupfer OOo wrote:
> G. Roderick Singleton wrote:
> > As an outside group, OOoAuthors is free to use whatever license it
> > likes. I have no problem with that. Just that items from OOoAuthors must
> > be non-editable to be included on http://documentation.op
G. Roderick Singleton wrote:
As an outside group, OOoAuthors is free to use whatever license it
likes. I have no problem with that. Just that items from OOoAuthors must
be non-editable to be included on http://documentation.openoffice.org/
This is certainly in keeping with the links you provided
G. Roderick Singleton wrote:
On Mon, 2005-07-18 at 13:14 -0500, Peter Kupfer OOo wrote:
G. Roderick Singleton wrote:
SO if you want to complain about progress or lack thereof at the doc
project or any of the NL projects, get involved with OpenOffice.org and
not a third party project that seems
On Tue, 2005-07-19 at 09:45 +1000, Jean Hollis Weber wrote:
> G. Roderick Singleton wrote:
> > Daniel did find it hard. I do not know or understand why. I do know he
> > did not like working within the existing system
>
> I'd like to comment on my own experience.
>
> I started at Docs in Decembe
G. Roderick Singleton wrote:
Daniel did find it hard. I do not know or understand why. I do know he
did not like working within the existing system
I'd like to comment on my own experience.
I started at Docs in December 2002, about six months before
Daniel did. I found working there one of th
G. Roderick Singleton wrote:
On Sat, 2005-07-16 at 16:02 +, Jonathon Blake wrote:
Charles wrote:
documentation project will soon release an HOW TO that will explain everything
there is to know about the OOo documentation work.
Only about five years to late.
xan
jonathon
Perhaps.
G. Roderick Singleton wrote:
I am not stopping you. I would like it though if the OOoAuthors group
would stop claiming to be an official OOo projects when in fact it is
not.
Trying to avoid getting too caught up in this, but OOC, where does
OOOAuthors make this claim?
--
Peter Kupfer -- U
GRS wrote:
> The other thing about the license is that this change has not been passed
> through the CC.
Please explain what "this change has not been passed through" means,?
Bearing in mind that:
i) It was discussed in the Community Council Meetings;
ii) It was approved by the Community Counc
On Tue, 2005-07-19 at 07:43 +1000, Jean Hollis Weber wrote:
> Andre Schnabel wrote:
> > Hi Jean,
> > As you may read, the discussion is about CC license for documents with
> > fixed content. I hope, you don't want to say, Daniel brought this idea
> > to the Community Council (to use document, dev
G. Roderick Singleton wrote:
I tried it and the document was promised a proof and review. Nada. I
waited considerable time then had it posted directly to documentation.
Mind this was back in January but that should not have stopped a review
but it did. I came away feeling NIH so ignore and it wil
On Tue, 2005-07-19 at 06:15 +1000, Jean Hollis Weber wrote:
> G. Roderick Singleton wrote:
> > I tried it and the document was promised a proof and review. Nada. I
> > waited considerable time then had it posted directly to documentation.
> > Mind this was back in January but that should not have s
Hi,
Please explain what "this change has not been passed through" means,?
Bearing in mind that:
i) It was discussed in the Community Council Meetings;
ii) It was approved by the Community Council meetings;
iii) Daniel said in a Community Council meeting that OOoAuthors was
going to use a dual
Andre Schnabel wrote:
Hi Jean,
As you may read, the discussion is about CC license for documents with
fixed content. I hope, you don't want to say, Daniel brought this idea
to the Community Council (to use document, developed at OOoAuthors as
fixed content within the OOo-project)?
No, I was
Andre Schnabel wrote:
Please explain what "this change has not been passed through" means,?
Bearing in mind that:
i) It was discussed in the Community Council Meetings;
ii) It was approved by the Community Council meetings;
iii) Daniel said in a Community Council meeting that OOoAuthors was
goin
Hi Jean,
Could we please stay with the facts? .. that means: please point to
the archives, where this can be verified, od stop the discussion as
it is pointless.
Here is a note from Louis, related to the minutes of a CC meeting held
2005-01-20 which included agreement to update the Guidelin
On Mon, 2005-07-18 at 13:14 -0500, Peter Kupfer OOo wrote:
> G. Roderick Singleton wrote:
> > On Sat, 2005-07-16 at 16:02 +, Jonathon Blake wrote:
> >
> >>Charles wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>documentation project will soon release an HOW TO that will explain
> >>>everything there is to know about t
GRS wrote:
> Really the archives do not support your statement.
I've got messages from that list that do support my claims.
xan
jonathon
--
Does your Office Suite conform to ISO Standards?
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PRO
On Tue, 2005-07-19 at 06:25 +1000, Jean Hollis Weber wrote:
> Andre Schnabel wrote:
> >> Please explain what "this change has not been passed through" means,?
> >>
> >> Bearing in mind that:
> >> i) It was discussed in the Community Council Meetings;
> >> ii) It was approved by the Community Counci
On Tue, 2005-07-19 at 06:54 +1000, Jean Hollis Weber wrote:
> G. Roderick Singleton wrote:
> > Jean Hollis Weber wrote:
> >>
> >>When you say "I tried it and the document was promised a proof
> >>and review", which document are you referring to and where did
> >>you submit it for review? Docs or
G. Roderick Singleton wrote:
Jean Hollis Weber wrote:
When you say "I tried it and the document was promised a proof
and review", which document are you referring to and where did
you submit it for review? Docs or OOoAuthors?
Way before you got involve. All was done on OOoAuthors though.
..
G. Roderick Singleton wrote a very biased "history" which
distorts several important facts and makes an offensive
accusation about the OOoAuthors project and those of us working
there.
I am not going to contribute to a flame war by answering his
points one by one, but I must say that if this
GRS wrote:
> Oh. I was not aware and was dealing in good faith.
I was writing in good faith.
> > I plonked him for this reason. Just refer to
Three threads of mine where Christian failed to comprehend what I wrote.
xan
jonathon
--
Does your Office Suite conform to ISO Standards?
--
On Sat, 2005-07-16 at 20:07 +0200, Christian Lohmaier wrote:
> Hi *,
>
> On Sat, Jul 16, 2005 at 01:32:41PM -0400, G. Roderick Singleton wrote:
> > On Sat, 2005-07-16 at 17:03 +, Jonathon Blake wrote:
> > > GRS wrote:
> > >
> > > > you sent them to the wrong place; hence the rejection.
> > >
Hi *,
On Sat, Jul 16, 2005 at 01:32:41PM -0400, G. Roderick Singleton wrote:
> On Sat, 2005-07-16 at 17:03 +, Jonathon Blake wrote:
> > GRS wrote:
> >
> > > you sent them to the wrong place; hence the rejection.
> >
> > If they were sent to the wrong place then that is because the
> > docume
GRS wrote:
> you sent them to the wrong place; hence the rejection.
If they were sent to the wrong place then that is because the
documentation said to submit them to the wrong place.
> If you have documents and will release them under PDL then make a task issue
> and assign it directly to grsi
Jonathon Blake wrote:
JC Hellry wrote:
The mail that started it all today was not productive. If that's the real OOo
way then no wonder you're getting forked.
It is the "real OOo" way.
If you're not happy with the way we lead our projects, you can either
ask the CC to replace us, or
JC Hellry wrote:
> The mail that started it all today was not productive. If that's the real OOo
> way then no wonder you're getting forked.
It is the "real OOo" way.
xan
jonthon
--
Does your Office Suite conform to ISO Standards?
---
GRS wrote:
> made one to documentation except on ooauthors.
a)My other contributions have thus far been apparently rejected ---
with _no_ explanation as to why.
b) I find it far more rewarding to work on documentation for another
project. So I spend my time writing documentation for it.
>get i
Letś get a little history.
History is written by the winners. What level of objectivity you are
considered to have when writting as the co-lead of the documentation ?
Besides, who cares about the past when the project welcomes new comers
every second from all around the world ?
Daniel fou
Charles wrote:
> documentation project will soon release an HOW TO that will explain
> everything there is to know about the OOo documentation work.
Only about five years to late.
xan
jonathon
--
Does your Office Suite conform to ISO Standards?
---
39 matches
Mail list logo
