On 6/6/2011 12:47 AM, Phil Steitz wrote:
On 6/5/11 10:16 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
ASF members wish to devote considerable time and energy to this
project, so exactly who the hell are you to decide what they should
and shouldn't devote that time and energy to?
I am just a volunteer
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 11:17 AM, Phil Steitz phil.ste...@gmail.com wrote:
On 6/5/11 10:16 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
Wow. Did it occur to you that the original project, Apache httpd,
was commercially exploited by vendors *even prior to the creation
of the Apache Software Foundation*?
On 6/6/2011 1:06 AM, Sanjiva Weerawarana wrote:
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 11:17 AM, Phil Steitz phil.ste...@gmail.com wrote:
On 6/5/11 10:16 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
Wow. Did it occur to you that the original project, Apache httpd,
was commercially exploited by vendors *even prior to the
On 6/5/11 11:02 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
On 6/6/2011 12:47 AM, Phil Steitz wrote:
On 6/5/11 10:16 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
ASF members wish to devote considerable time and energy to this
project, so exactly who the hell are you to decide what they should
and shouldn't devote that
Hi,
Le 6 juin 11 à 02:28, William A. Rowe Jr. a écrit :
Because Oracle and TDF, in confidential negotiations, could not
come to an agreement.
Also that's one more reason why OpenOffice.org should be hosted by
the Apache Foundation.
For the memory, LibreOffice and TDF have been created
On 6/5/11 11:26 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
On 6/6/2011 1:06 AM, Sanjiva Weerawarana wrote:
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 11:17 AM, Phil Steitz phil.ste...@gmail.com wrote:
On 6/5/11 10:16 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
Wow. Did it occur to you that the original project, Apache httpd,
was
On Jun 5, 2011, at 11:34 PM, Phil Steitz wrote:
On 6/5/11 11:02 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
On 6/6/2011 12:47 AM, Phil Steitz wrote:
On 6/5/11 10:16 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
ASF members wish to devote considerable time and energy to this
project, so exactly who the hell are you to
Christian Lippka schreef:
Am 06.06.2011 00:28, schrieb Simon Brouwer:
Op 5-6-2011 19:19, Christian Lippka schreef:
Hi Ralph,
Am 05.06.2011 18:46, schrieb Ralph Goers:
On Jun 5, 2011, at 8:59 AM, Joe Schaefer wrote:
I posted a similar statement yesterday. Personally, I think the
traffic
Or rather, the incubator needs to evaluate current proposals on its current
methodology, and (in a quiet time between proposals) generate more specific
criteria for incubation, independent of any particular proposal. I just
find it rude to change the rules of the game during the match.
That
Hi,
William A. Rowe Jr. wrote on 2011-06-06 02.28:
Because Oracle and TDF, in confidential negotiations, could not come to
an agreement. And I think that's all that need be said on the matter.
well, I guess it has been mentioned on this list before, but let me
state it this way:
What TDF
Hi,
robert_w...@us.ibm.com wrote on 2011-06-06 02.37:
And I remind you of this response I gave you before:
http://markmail.org/message/wwoxum4tuvdg5q3p
I guess we're running in circles. However, I have made my points and
hopefully responded to some rumors spreading (like: TDF is no choice
Hi Sam,
Sam Ruby wrote on 2011-06-06 02.02:
I can tell you that those decisions are made above Rob's and my pay
grades. Way above.
maybe - looking behind corporate walls, so to say, is sometimes a bit
complicated. I don't personally blame anyone for this, but reading some
rumors or
On 6 June 2011 12:43, Florian Effenberger flo...@documentfoundation.orgwrote:
given that the granted source code seems to be lacking important parts, and
there is no real idea on how to provide continuity for users (e.g. releasing
OOo 3.4.0). All of this will do *much* harm, IMHO even more
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 3:37 AM, robert_w...@us.ibm.com wrote:
Simon Phipps si...@webmink.com wrote on 06/05/2011 07:49:41 PM:
From: Simon Phipps si...@webmink.com
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Date: 06/05/2011 07:50 PM
Subject: Re: OpenOffice: were are we now?
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 12
On Jun 5, 2011, at 8:17 PM, Simon Phipps wrote:
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 1:06 AM, robert_w...@us.ibm.com wrote:
I would recommend altering the proposal. We have the set of files
specified in the software grant. During incubation, we will seek a
grant to the following groups of code: bullet
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 1:52 PM, Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com wrote:
On Jun 5, 2011, at 8:17 PM, Simon Phipps wrote:
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 1:06 AM, robert_w...@us.ibm.com wrote:
I would recommend altering the proposal. We have the set of files
specified in the software grant. During
: Re: Initial source files (was: OpenOffice: were are we now?)
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 1:52 PM, Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com wrote:
On Jun 5, 2011, at 8:17 PM, Simon Phipps wrote:
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 1:06 AM, robert_w...@us.ibm.com wrote:
I would recommend altering
On Jun 6, 2011, at 9:02 AM, Simon Phipps wrote:
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 1:52 PM, Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com wrote:
On Jun 5, 2011, at 8:17 PM, Simon Phipps wrote:
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 1:06 AM, robert_w...@us.ibm.com wrote:
I would recommend altering the proposal. We have the set
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 2:07 PM, Joe Schaefer joe_schae...@yahoo.com wrote:
Like most aspects of Apache, it's easier to ask for forgiveness
than to seek permission, epecially when we don't all agree on
the necessity of it ;-).
Given I had actually asked for and received permission from the
worry too much about it, Simon.
- Original Message
From: Simon Phipps si...@webmink.com
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Sent: Mon, June 6, 2011 9:11:33 AM
Subject: Re: Initial source files (was: OpenOffice: were are we now?)
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 2:07 PM, Joe Schaefer joe_schae
Subject: Re: Initial source files (was: OpenOffice: were are we now?)
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 2:07 PM, Joe Schaefer joe_schae...@yahoo.com wrote:
Like most aspects of Apache, it's easier to ask for forgiveness
than to seek permission, epecially when we don't all agree on
the necessity
files (was: OpenOffice: were are we now?)
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 2:07 PM, Joe Schaefer joe_schae...@yahoo.com
wrote:
Like most aspects of Apache, it's easier to ask for forgiveness
than to seek permission, epecially when we don't all agree on
the necessity of it ;-).
Given I had
On 6/6/2011 4:55 AM, Christian Grobmeier wrote:
that being said - can OOo really be treated like each other podling? I
start to feel it might not be the case. Can we change the rules while
the game? Yes, we can. I would be very dissappointed if we would obey
blindly to our own rules just
On 6/6/11 2:48, Phil Steitz wrote:
On 6/5/11 11:26 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
On 6/6/2011 1:06 AM, Sanjiva Weerawarana wrote:
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 11:17 AM, Phil Steitzphil.ste...@gmail.com wrote:
On 6/5/11 10:16 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
Wow. Did it occur to you that the
Hi,
Richard S. Hall wrote on 2011-06-06 16.19:
However, it seems like we have lost sight of the fact that TDF split the
community from OOo. Sure, Oracle is the perceived villain and TDF the
perceived good guy, but it doesn't change the fact that OOo created the
community in the first place.
Hi Richard, *
2011/6/6 Richard S. Hall he...@ungoverned.org
On 6/6/11 2:48, Phil Steitz wrote:
On 6/5/11 11:26 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
On 6/6/2011 1:06 AM, Sanjiva Weerawarana wrote:
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 11:17 AM, Phil Steitzphil.ste...@gmail.com wrote:
[...]
Disclaimer: I
On Jun 6, 2011, at 7:41 AM, Manfred A. Reiter wrote:
Hi Richard, *
2011/6/6 Richard S. Hall he...@ungoverned.org
On 6/6/11 2:48, Phil Steitz wrote:
On 6/5/11 11:26 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
On 6/6/2011 1:06 AM, Sanjiva Weerawarana wrote:
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 11:17 AM, Phil
On 6/6/11 10:41, Manfred A. Reiter wrote:
Hi Richard, *
2011/6/6 Richard S. Hallhe...@ungoverned.org
On 6/6/11 2:48, Phil Steitz wrote:
On 6/5/11 11:26 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
On 6/6/2011 1:06 AM, Sanjiva Weerawarana wrote:
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 11:17 AM, Phil
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 3:52 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. wr...@rowe-clan.net wrote:
To the extent that OOo presents the incubator with something the ASF has
not faced, you are correct... these things we have no standards yet to
measure whether a podling should be accepted. To the extent that it is
On 6/6/11 10:33, Florian Effenberger wrote:
Hi,
Richard S. Hall wrote on 2011-06-06 16.19:
However, it seems like we have lost sight of the fact that TDF split the
community from OOo. Sure, Oracle is the perceived villain and TDF the
perceived good guy, but it doesn't change the fact that OOo
Hi Ralph,
2011/6/6 Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.com:
On Jun 6, 2011, at 7:41 AM, Manfred A. Reiter wrote:
[...]
Under these conditions, I'll change my entry in the wiki.
done.
Manfred,
I wouldn't be so hasty. There are lots of opinions around here and we all
need a bit of a
- Original Message
From: Jochen Wiedmann jochen.wiedm...@gmail.com
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Sent: Mon, June 6, 2011 11:04:31 AM
Subject: Re: OpenOffice: were are we now?
- Concentration on binaries: Apache projects are usually all about
source code. For example, Apache
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 6:02 PM, Richard S. Hall he...@ungoverned.org wrote:
On 6/6/11 10:41, Manfred A. Reiter wrote:
Hi Richard, *
2011/6/6 Richard S. Hallhe...@ungoverned.org
On 6/6/11 2:48, Phil Steitz wrote:
On 6/5/11 11:26 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
On 6/6/2011 1:06 AM, Sanjiva
On 6/6/11 11:26, Simos Xenitellis wrote:
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 6:02 PM, Richard S. Hallhe...@ungoverned.org wrote:
On 6/6/11 10:41, Manfred A. Reiter wrote:
Hi Richard, *
2011/6/6 Richard S. Hallhe...@ungoverned.org
On 6/6/11 2:48, Phil Steitz wrote:
On 6/5/11 11:26 PM, William A. Rowe
On 6 June 2011 16:39, Richard S. Hall he...@ungoverned.org wrote:
On 6/6/11 11:26, Simos Xenitellis wrote:
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 6:02 PM, Richard S. Hallhe...@ungoverned.org
wrote:
On 6/6/11 10:41, Manfred A. Reiter wrote:
Hi Richard, *
2011/6/6 Richard S. Hallhe...@ungoverned.org
Hi Simos, *,
2011/6/6 Simos Xenitellis simos.li...@googlemail.com:
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 6:02 PM, Richard S. Hall he...@ungoverned.org wrote:
On 6/6/11 10:41, Manfred A. Reiter wrote:
Hi Richard, *
2011/6/6 Richard S. Hallhe...@ungoverned.org
[...]
Fact: Your employer provoked the
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 11:46, Ian Lynch ianrly...@gmail.com wrote:
...
And the natural extension is that if there is no home for the OOo code with
Apache where will it end up? That scenario is not without risk either.
As I've said elsewhere, I would lobby our Board for an unsupported
tarball of
On 6 June 2011 17:08, Greg Stein gst...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 11:46, Ian Lynch ianrly...@gmail.com wrote:
...
And the natural extension is that if there is no home for the OOo code
with
Apache where will it end up? That scenario is not without risk either.
As I've said
On Mon, 2011-06-06 at 12:08 -0400, Greg Stein wrote:
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 11:46, Ian Lynch ianrly...@gmail.com wrote:
...
And the natural extension is that if there is no home for the OOo code with
Apache where will it end up? That scenario is not without risk either.
As I've said
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 6:39 PM, Richard S. Hall he...@ungoverned.org wrote:
On 6/6/11 11:26, Simos Xenitellis wrote:
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 6:02 PM, Richard S. Hallhe...@ungoverned.org
wrote:
On 6/6/11 10:41, Manfred A. Reiter wrote:
Hi Richard, *
2011/6/6 Richard S.
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 13:37, Simos Xenitellis
simos.li...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 6:39 PM, Richard S. Hall he...@ungoverned.org wrote:
On 6/6/11 11:26, Simos Xenitellis wrote:
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 6:02 PM, Richard S. Hallhe...@ungoverned.org
wrote:
On 6/6/11 10:41,
On 6/6/11 13:50, Greg Stein wrote:
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 13:37, Simos Xenitellis
simos.li...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 6:39 PM, Richard S. Hallhe...@ungoverned.org wrote:
On 6/6/11 11:26, Simos Xenitellis wrote:
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 6:02 PM, Richard S.
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 14:17, Richard S. Hall he...@ungoverned.org wrote:
On 6/6/11 13:50, Greg Stein wrote:
...
How about we drop these lines of discussion, and simply follow Ross'
advice and focus on what is needed by the Incubator PMC to accept
this proposal?
While I agree that a lot of
On 6/6/11 14:26, Greg Stein wrote:
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 14:17, Richard S. Hallhe...@ungoverned.org wrote:
On 6/6/11 13:50, Greg Stein wrote:
...
How about we drop these lines of discussion, and simply follow Ross'
advice and focus on what is needed by the Incubator PMC to accept
this
Concerning the extensions, by reading the file Sam Ruby uploaded,
the following extensions are in the grant:
* PDF Import (module sdext)
* Presentation Minimizer (module sdext)
* Presenter Console (module sdext)
* Report Builder (modules reportbuilder, reportdesign)
* Wiki publisher (module
Hi all,
I have tried to follow as much as emails as possible but it's
overwhelming. Anyway I feel that several questions do not longer
belong to the pre-incubation phase but should be clarified after we
have accepted the podling. Many questions are around Can/Should we
have a second office
On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 8:02 AM, Christian Grobmeier grobme...@gmail.com wrote:
Again are we able to vote on the podling? If no, please specifiy why?
Not just yet. I don't want anyone to feel that we rushed this. It
has been less than four days. A number of threads are still active
You are
Not just yet. I don't want anyone to feel that we rushed this.
Oh, i didn't want to rush
If that progress can be made in less than 24 hours, imagine what the
next 24, 48, or even 72 hours will bring.
Compared and good :-)
My expectation is that the right time to hold a vote will be by the
On Jun 5, 2011, at 8:43 AM, Ralph Goers wrote:
I posted a similar statement yesterday. Personally, I think the traffic on
this list has settled down a lot in the last 24 hours and is now focusing in
on topics more relevant to this list. But maybe that is just because it was
Saturday :-)
- Original Message
From: Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.com
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Sent: Sun, June 5, 2011 11:43:47 AM
Subject: Re: OpenOffice: were are we now?
On Jun 5, 2011, at 6:26 AM, Christian Grobmeier wrote:
Not just yet. I don't want anyone to feel
FYI- here's a link to the Harmony proposal:
http://s.apache.org/KPG
- Original Message
From: Joe Schaefer joe_schae...@yahoo.com
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Sent: Sun, June 5, 2011 1:01:38 PM
Subject: Re: OpenOffice: were are we now?
- Original Message
From
Hi Ralph,
Am 05.06.2011 18:46, schrieb Ralph Goers:
On Jun 5, 2011, at 8:59 AM, Joe Schaefer wrote:
I posted a similar statement yesterday. Personally, I think the traffic
on this list has settled down a lot in the last 24 hours and is now
focusing in on topics more relevant to this list.
On 6/5/2011 10:43 AM, Ralph Goers wrote:
I posted a similar statement yesterday. Personally, I think the traffic on
this list has settled down a lot in the last 24 hours and is now focusing in
on topics more relevant to this list. But maybe that is just because it was
Saturday :-)
On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 14:05, William A. Rowe Jr. wr...@rowe-clan.net wrote:
On 6/5/2011 10:43 AM, Ralph Goers wrote:
I posted a similar statement yesterday. Personally, I think the traffic on
this list has settled down a lot in the last 24 hours and is now focusing in
on topics more
On Sun, 2011-06-05 at 10:01 -0700, Joe Schaefer wrote:
- Original Message
snip
Personally I have no idea how my daily workload will be affected by dealing
with OOo's infra requirements. If it just means dishing out dedicated
resources
and setting up end-user services, that
On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 14:24, Simon Phipps si...@webmink.com wrote:
On 5 Jun 2011, at 19:15, Greg Stein wrote:
On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 14:05, William A. Rowe Jr. wr...@rowe-clan.net
wrote:
On 6/5/2011 10:43 AM, Ralph Goers wrote:
...
What I am still waiting to hear on are:
1. The amount of
to the task, we'll try to give you just enough rope
not to hang yourself as you get started.
- Original Message
From: drew d...@baseanswers.com
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Sent: Sun, June 5, 2011 2:24:20 PM
Subject: Re: OpenOffice: were are we now?
On Sun, 2011-06-05 at 10:01
Totally offtopic, but
On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 11:59, Joe Schaefer joe_schae...@yahoo.com wrote:
...
2. The amount of work that will be required to rework dependencies.
Not a blocker for starting incubation. Keep in mind that the podling may
elect to release via the libreoffice
On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 7:53 PM, Greg Stein gst...@gmail.com wrote:
No, we don't need the comprehensive list to start.
OK, that's good. It will be worth gathering a group of experts to build a
comprehensive view. I suggest that include LibreOffice developers too.
After all that, then we can
Hi,
Am 05.06.2011 20:24, schrieb Simon Phipps:
I'm more interested in the list of files from the Hg repository that
are NOT in that list. I gotta believe it is non-zero, so what are
they, and how much of a problem will that be?
I've been discussing this privately with some folk, and while
Hello Simon,
On Sunday 05 June 2011, 15:58, Simon Phipps wrote:
While the extensions in particular are a concern (plenty of us will be
horrified to lose the Presenter Console from Impress for example), it's
also important to get the work that was in progress internal to Sun on
core code
Niall Pemberton niall.pember...@gmail.com wrote on 06/05/2011 02:21:01
PM:
This proposal raises lots of questions, but the requirements for
entering the incubator are not high and so IMO don't need to be
answered before a vote. The only reason I believe for rejecting this
proposal would be
robert_w...@us.ibm.com
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Sent: Sun, June 5, 2011 3:44:35 PM
Subject: Re: OpenOffice: were are we now?
Niall Pemberton niall.pember...@gmail.com wrote on 06/05/2011 02:21:01
PM:
This proposal raises lots of questions, but the requirements for
entering
Joe Schaefer joe_schae...@yahoo.com wrote on 06/05/2011 03:57:05 PM:
To bridge that gap will require trust bonds to be built on
both sides. Generosity with the use of the OOo mark on our
part combined with generosity from TDF regarding build/distribution
resources is just a first step in
robert_w...@us.ibm.com
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Sent: Sun, June 5, 2011 4:18:53 PM
Subject: Re: OpenOffice: were are we now?
Joe Schaefer joe_schae...@yahoo.com wrote on 06/05/2011 03:57:05 PM:
To bridge that gap will require trust bonds to be built on
both sides. Generosity
On 6/5/11 11:21 AM, Niall Pemberton wrote:
On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 1:02 PM, Christian Grobmeier grobme...@gmail.com
wrote:
Hi all,
I have tried to follow as much as emails as possible but it's
overwhelming. Anyway I feel that several questions do not longer
belong to the pre-incubation
On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 9:44 PM, robert_w...@us.ibm.com wrote:
I am puzzled by the view one open source project should not compete
against another.
And I am puzzled how you don't accept that open source *allows*
forking and all that stuff, but that doesn't mean that competition is
necessarily
Joe Schaefer joe_schae...@yahoo.com wrote on 06/05/2011 04:22:35 PM:
Sounds great, but so far I count only 2 committers on the
project associated with IBM. IMO you're off by a factor
or so, so claims that IBM intends to take this project
seriously will be discounted by me until that is
From: Phil Steitz phil.ste...@gmail.com
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Date: 06/05/2011 04:34 PM
Subject: Re: OpenOffice: were are we now?
On 6/5/11 11:21 AM, Niall Pemberton wrote:
We should also remember that, with Oracle abandoning OO, we are being
used to facilitate
Jochen Wiedmann jochen.wiedm...@gmail.com wrote on 06/05/2011 04:49:20
PM:
On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 9:44 PM, robert_w...@us.ibm.com wrote:
I am puzzled by the view one open source project should not compete
against another.
And I am puzzled how you don't accept that open source
On 5 June 2011 21:59, robert_w...@us.ibm.com wrote:
It is amazing how much paperwork is involved, at a large corporation, to
enable such things.
Good reason to set up your own company ;-)
On 6/5/11 16:50, Jochen Wiedmann wrote:
On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 8:21 PM, Niall Pemberton
niall.pember...@gmail.com wrote:
IMO the only negative thing then about LibreOffice is the copyleft
license - everything else about them is great. When deciding whether
to accept OO we should consider
Sent from my mobile device (so please excuse typos)
On 5 Jun 2011, at 19:21, Niall Pemberton niall.pember...@gmail.com wrote:
IMO the only negative thing then about LibreOffice is the copyleft
license - everything else about them is great. When deciding whether
to accept OO we should
On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 8:44 PM, Ariel Constenla-Haile
ariel.constenla.ha...@googlemail.com wrote:
Concerning the extensions, by reading the file Sam Ruby uploaded, the
following
extensions are in the grant:
snip
Thanks, I'd missed those. Reassuring :-)
I don't see the MySQL
On Jun 5, 2011, at 11:24 AM, Simon Phipps wrote:
On 5 Jun 2011, at 19:15, Greg Stein wrote:
On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 14:05, William A. Rowe Jr. wr...@rowe-clan.net
wrote:
On 6/5/2011 10:43 AM, Ralph Goers wrote:
I posted a similar statement yesterday. Personally, I think the traffic on
Am 05.06.2011 21:34, schrieb André Schnabel:
Hi,
Am 05.06.2011 20:24, schrieb Simon Phipps:
I'm more interested in the list of files from the Hg repository that
are NOT in that list. I gotta believe it is non-zero, so what are
they, and how much of a problem will that be?
I've been
Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.com wrote on 06/05/2011 06:21:06 PM:
I personally don't need anything sorted out before the project
enters incubation. All I care about is whether the community will be
able to effectively deal with it or be blocked by it. That just
requires some idea of
On Jun 5, 2011, at 3:30 PM, Niall Pemberton wrote:
I agree with you - in this case I think it would be better if IBM
collaborated with LibreOffice, rather than seeking to compete. But I
could be wrong.
I don't work for IBM but I do work for a corporation that uses a similar
business
Am 06.06.2011 00:28, schrieb Simon Brouwer:
Op 5-6-2011 19:19, Christian Lippka schreef:
Hi Ralph,
Am 05.06.2011 18:46, schrieb Ralph Goers:
On Jun 5, 2011, at 8:59 AM, Joe Schaefer wrote:
I posted a similar statement yesterday. Personally, I think the
traffic
on this list has settled
robert_w...@us.ibm.com wrote (05-06-11 23:25)
So, it does not logically follow that if a proposal at Apache is rejected
that we go to TDF/LO.
After all, why would you ?
--
- Cor
- http://nl.libreoffice.org
-
To
On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 10:30 PM, Richard S. Hall he...@ungoverned.org wrote:
On 6/5/11 16:50, Jochen Wiedmann wrote:
On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 8:21 PM, Niall Pemberton
niall.pember...@gmail.com wrote:
IMO the only negative thing then about LibreOffice is the copyleft
license - everything else
Niall Pemberton niall.pember...@gmail.com wrote on 06/05/2011 06:30:06
PM:
I agree with you - in this case I think it would be better if IBM
collaborated with LibreOffice, rather than seeking to compete. But I
could be wrong.
And I support 100% your right to have that opinion and to
On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 9:27 PM, Phil Steitz phil.ste...@gmail.com wrote:
On 6/5/11 11:21 AM, Niall Pemberton wrote:
On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 1:02 PM, Christian Grobmeier grobme...@gmail.com
wrote:
Hi all,
I have tried to follow as much as emails as possible but it's
overwhelming. Anyway I
On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 11:51 PM, robert_w...@us.ibm.com wrote:
Niall Pemberton niall.pember...@gmail.com wrote on 06/05/2011 06:30:06
PM:
I agree with you - in this case I think it would be better if IBM
collaborated with LibreOffice, rather than seeking to compete. But I
could be wrong.
Niall Pemberton niall.pember...@gmail.com wrote on 06/05/2011 06:45:16
PM:
I'll lend a voice to the contrary.
I can't see why splitting a community should be a factor in entry to
the
incubator. Just about every new open source community is trying topull
away
developers from another
decisions rarely have anything to
do with each other.
- Original Message
From: Niall Pemberton niall.pember...@gmail.com
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Sent: Sun, June 5, 2011 7:02:02 PM
Subject: Re: OpenOffice: were are we now?
On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 11:51 PM, robert_w...@us.ibm.com
On Jun 5, 2011, at 3:45 PM, Niall Pemberton wrote:
On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 10:30 PM, Richard S. Hall he...@ungoverned.org wrote:
On 6/5/11 16:50, Jochen Wiedmann wrote:
On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 8:21 PM, Niall Pemberton
niall.pember...@gmail.com wrote:
IMO the only negative thing then
On Jun 5, 2011, at 4:02 PM, Niall Pemberton wrote:
On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 11:51 PM, robert_w...@us.ibm.com wrote:
Niall Pemberton niall.pember...@gmail.com wrote on 06/05/2011 06:30:06
PM:
I agree with you - in this case I think it would be better if IBM
collaborated with LibreOffice,
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 12:04 AM, robert_w...@us.ibm.com wrote:
Niall Pemberton niall.pember...@gmail.com wrote on 06/05/2011 06:45:16
PM:
I'll lend a voice to the contrary.
I can't see why splitting a community should be a factor in entry to
the
incubator. Just about every new open
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 12:24 AM, Niall Pemberton
niall.pember...@gmail.comwrote:
It could be argued either way. I am sure if IBM put its efforts to
LibreOffice then I'm sure it would be a great success. So why doesn't
IBM want to take part when theres a great FOSS community already in
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 12:19 AM, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.com wrote:
On Jun 5, 2011, at 3:45 PM, Niall Pemberton wrote:
On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 10:30 PM, Richard S. Hall he...@ungoverned.org
wrote:
On 6/5/11 16:50, Jochen Wiedmann wrote:
On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 8:21 PM, Niall
On Jun 5, 2011, at 4:24 PM, Niall Pemberton wrote:
It could be argued either way. I am sure if IBM put its efforts to
LibreOffice then I'm sure it would be a great success. So why doesn't
IBM want to take part when theres a great FOSS community already in
existence?
Did you not read my
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 12:28 AM, Simon Phipps si...@webmink.com wrote:
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 12:24 AM, Niall Pemberton
niall.pember...@gmail.comwrote:
It could be argued either way. I am sure if IBM put its efforts to
LibreOffice then I'm sure it would be a great success. So why doesn't
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 12:30 AM, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.com wrote:
On Jun 5, 2011, at 4:24 PM, Niall Pemberton wrote:
It could be argued either way. I am sure if IBM put its efforts to
LibreOffice then I'm sure it would be a great success. So why doesn't
IBM want to take part
On Jun 5, 2011, at 4:33 PM, Niall Pemberton wrote:
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 12:30 AM, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.com
wrote:
On Jun 5, 2011, at 4:24 PM, Niall Pemberton wrote:
It could be argued either way. I am sure if IBM put its efforts to
LibreOffice then I'm sure it would be
On 6/5/11 6:45 PM, Niall Pemberton wrote:
On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 10:30 PM, Richard S. Hallhe...@ungoverned.org wrote:
On 6/5/11 16:50, Jochen Wiedmann wrote:
On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 8:21 PM, Niall Pemberton
niall.pember...@gmail.comwrote:
IMO the only negative thing then about
On Jun 5, 2011, at 4:33 PM, Niall Pemberton wrote:
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 12:30 AM, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.com
wrote:
On Jun 5, 2011, at 4:24 PM, Niall Pemberton wrote:
It could be argued either way. I am sure if IBM put its efforts to
LibreOffice then I'm sure it would be
On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 18:18, Simon Phipps si...@webmink.com wrote:
On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 8:44 PM, Ariel Constenla-Haile
ariel.constenla.ha...@googlemail.com wrote:
...
I don't see the MySQL Connector module there
http://hg.services.openoffice.org/DEV300/file/DEV300_m106/mysqlc
Another
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 12:38 AM, Richard S. Hall he...@ungoverned.orgwrote:
I don't think the proposal here is for OOo to enter incubation and then try
to copy everything that TDF/LO does. I assume the proposers have a vision
for where they want to go, even though they may be starting from
Hi,
robert_w...@us.ibm.com wrote on 2011-06-06 01.48:
Give me a citation please where anyone from IBM said the preference of
Apache to TDF/OO was due only to the license?
I've been asking for reasons since my first e-mail to this list, but you
didn't reply so far. So, if you could elaborate
1 - 100 of 126 matches
Mail list logo
