Hi,
Le 19 déc. 11 à 20:40, Simon Phipps a écrit :
As Graham keeps hinting, treating this as a strength seems to be
both the right marketing policy and a great opportunity to move
beyond past hurts.
Your patches are welcome :-)
Regards,
Eric Bachard
--
qɔᴉɹə
Projet OOo4Kids :
Hi Pedro,
On Sat, 2011-12-17 at 16:38 -0800, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
And it's usually so much easier to take. Steve jobs
had a famous quote about that that I don't remember
very well ;-).
But wait, did I confuse you with the chap who suggested that Apple's
non-contribution back to
--- Lun 19/12/11, Michael Meeks michael.me...@suse.com ha scritto:
Hi Pedro,
On Mon, 2011-12-19 at 06:32 -0800, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
I'd prefer to see myself as part of the freedom
loving,
non-corporate dominated group of hackers having
fun.
And that's fine because you are not
On 12/17/11 4:44 PM, Simon Phipps wrote:
Surely that's just a matter of fact, though? When AOO makes a new release,
it will be a different codebase under a different brand, so on both charts
would show as a new block.
why do you think that it is a different code base? It is exactly the
code
On Mon, 2011-12-19 at 08:40 -0800, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
Please don't take anything personally. I just find it
amusing that your signature says you are a pseudo-engineer,
Ah ! fair cop :-) that's so people don't take me too seriously, and
hopefully a good reminder to not take myself so;
On 19 Dec 2011, at 16:56, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
On 12/17/11 4:44 PM, Simon Phipps wrote:
Surely that's just a matter of fact, though? When AOO makes a new release,
it will be a different codebase under a different brand, so on both charts
would show as a new block.
why do you think that
On Sat, Dec 17, 2011 at 6:38 PM, Pedro Giffuni p...@apache.org wrote:
--- Sab 17/12/11, Michael Meeks ha scritto:
Sure - if it is easier for us to include
an existing feature, under an
acceptable license into LibreOffice why would we bother
re-writing it ?
conversely if it is easier
--- Dom 18/12/11, Norbert Thiebaud nthieb...@gmail.com ha scritto:
...
On Sat, Dec 17, 2011 at 6:38 PM,
Pedro Giffuni p...@apache.org
wrote:
--- Sab 17/12/11, Michael Meeks ha scritto:
Sure - if it is easier for us to include
an existing feature, under an
acceptable license
On 17/12/2011 eric b wrote:
the french version pretends
Apache OpenOffice.org ( http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenOffice.org ) is
a fork
We probably should take an eye on the Italian and the German versions.
The Italian one has a terse but accurate description.
Regards,
Andrea.
On 17 Dec 2011, at 01:29, Ross Gardler wrote:
On 15 November 2011 22:47, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote:
http://www.robweir.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/oo-forks.png
Rob. I might need to reuse this, can I assume it is OK to do so. I
don't plan to edit it in any way, just rename
On Sat, Dec 17, 2011 at 9:40 AM, Simon Phipps si...@webmink.com wrote:
On 17 Dec 2011, at 01:29, Ross Gardler wrote:
On 15 November 2011 22:47, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote:
http://www.robweir.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/oo-forks.png
Rob. I might need to reuse this, can I
Thanks Simon, unfortunately the representation here, indicating the date of
the last release as the end of the line (literally) is not really the
message I'm after.
Sent from my mobile device, please forgive errors and brevity.
On Dec 17, 2011 2:40 PM, Simon Phipps si...@webmink.com wrote:
On
Surely that's just a matter of fact, though? When AOO makes a new release,
it will be a different codebase under a different brand, so on both charts
would show as a new block. Michael's has the advantage that it shows the
relative adoption of the various lines, something that Rob's (by including
On 17 December 2011 15:44, Simon Phipps si...@webmink.com wrote:
Michael's has the advantage that it shows the
relative adoption of the various lines, something that Rob's (by including
every possible variant regardless of relevance) tends to hide.
It's not the relative adoption I want to
On Dec 17, 2011 4:13 PM, Ross Gardler rgard...@opendirective.com wrote:
It's not the relative adoption I want to show. If I did want that then
Michaels would indeed be a better document).
What do you want to show? Maybe one of us can help by coming up with a
suitable graphical representation
Sent from my mobile device, please forgive errors and brevity.
On Dec 17, 2011 5:09 PM, Simon Phipps si...@webmink.com wrote:
On Dec 17, 2011 4:13 PM, Ross Gardler rgard...@opendirective.com
wrote:
It's not the relative adoption I want to show. If I did want that then
Michaels would indeed
Does that include converters and commercial offerings that have embedded
support for ODF consumption and production? (I suppose if Symphony is in that
diagram, the answer is yes at least for embedded support.)
- Dennis
-Original Message-
From: Ross Gardler
On Dec 17, 2011 5:25 PM, Ross Gardler rgard...@opendirective.com wrote:
I'm looking for something that shows diversity in the open document format
ecosystem.
Ah, OK. Rob's chart is unsuitable for that, as he only shows projects that
have rebranded or reused OpenOffice.org at some time in
On 17 December 2011 19:25, Dennis E. Hamilton dennis.hamil...@acm.org wrote:
Does that include converters and commercial offerings that have embedded
support for ODF consumption and production? (I suppose if Symphony is in
that diagram, the answer is yes at least for embedded support.)
On 17 December 2011 19:50, Simon Phipps si...@webmink.com wrote:
On Dec 17, 2011 5:25 PM, Ross Gardler rgard...@opendirective.com wrote:
I'm looking for something that shows diversity in the open document format
ecosystem.
Ah, OK. Rob's chart is unsuitable for that, as he only shows projects
On Sat, Dec 17, 2011 at 3:42 PM, Ross Gardler
rgard...@opendirective.com wrote:
On 17 December 2011 19:25, Dennis E. Hamilton dennis.hamil...@acm.org wrote:
Does that include converters and commercial offerings that have embedded
support for ODF consumption and production? (I suppose if
Hi Rob,
On Sat, 2011-12-17 at 09:49 -0500, Rob Weir wrote:
Did you also see Michael Meeks' attempt to visualise this context?
http://people.gnome.org/~michael/blog/2011-11-18-graphs.html
...
What that chart fails to show is the family tree. it suggests that
LibreOffice is something
On 17 December 2011 22:01, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote:
On Sat, Dec 17, 2011 at 3:42 PM, Ross Gardler
rgard...@opendirective.com wrote:
On 17 December 2011 19:25, Dennis E. Hamilton dennis.hamil...@acm.org
wrote:
Does that include converters and commercial offerings that have embedded
Lets not dive into another Us Vs Them argument, its not productive or necessary.
Clearly Robs graphic is not suitable for my purpose, neither is
Michaels. However, Simons suggestion of using the Wikipedia article is
a good one.
Ross
Hi,
Le 17 déc. 11 à 23:26, Ross Gardler a écrit :
Lets not dive into another Us Vs Them argument, its not productive
or necessary.
Clearly Robs graphic is not suitable for my purpose,
Well, it is not that bad.
neither is
Michaels. However, Simons suggestion of using the Wikipedia
On 17 December 2011 22:50, eric b eric.bach...@free.fr wrote:
Hi,
Le 17 déc. 11 à 23:26, Ross Gardler a écrit :
Lets not dive into another Us Vs Them argument, its not productive or
necessary.
Clearly Robs graphic is not suitable for my purpose,
Well, it is not that bad.
No it is not,
Hi Ross,
It's interesting to browse wikipedia pages named
http://xx.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenOffice.org;
Change xx to your favorite language code, for example, el, which
makes http://el.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenOffice.org;
And you can not find Apache on the el page, can you?
Now try:
--- Sab 17/12/11, Michael Meeks ha scritto:
Sure - if it is easier for us to include
an existing feature, under an
acceptable license into LibreOffice why would we bother
re-writing it ?
conversely if it is easier to re-write, why not ?
And it's usually so much easier to take.
On 15 November 2011 22:47, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote:
http://www.robweir.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/oo-forks.png
Rob. I might need to reuse this, can I assume it is OK to do so. I
don't plan to edit it in any way, just rename it to oo-derivatives
(or similar) and move to an
On 15 November 2011 18:03, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote:
On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 12:46 PM, Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com wrote:
I have been mulling this over for a long time...
Up to now, we have been reactionary. We have allowed others to
control and distort the message, paint things
On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 8:29 PM, Ross Gardler
rgard...@opendirective.com wrote:
On 15 November 2011 22:47, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote:
http://www.robweir.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/oo-forks.png
Rob. I might need to reuse this, can I assume it is OK to do so. I
don't plan to
On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 8:34 PM, Ross Gardler
rgard...@opendirective.com wrote:
On 15 November 2011 18:03, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote:
On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 12:46 PM, Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com wrote:
I have been mulling this over for a long time...
Up to now, we have been
Hi Rob,
On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 5:55 AM, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote:
I have no idea. But my impression was that Oracle was not withholding
any relevant trademarks or domain names from us.
Thanks. We will get concrete answers later some day I hope :)
Thanks,
khirano
Hi Jim,
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 2:46 AM, Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com wrote:
I think it's time that an Open Letter to the entire Open Office
ecosystem (companies, entities, individuals, etc...) be drafted
that sets the record straight.
And I volunteer to drive this task...
When you draft
Sent from my mobile device, please forgive errors and brevity.
On Nov 28, 2011 8:05 AM, Kazunari Hirano khir...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Rob,
On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 5:55 AM, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote:
I have no idea. But my impression was that Oracle was not withholding
any relevant
Hi Ross,
On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 5:42 PM, Ross Gardler
rgard...@opendirective.com wrote:
A question to tradema...@apache.org will yield an answer quickly if anyone
needs to know.
Thanks. I will subscribe tradema...@apache.org and post my question.
On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 3:57 AM, Kazunari Hirano khir...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Ross,
On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 5:42 PM, Ross Gardler
rgard...@opendirective.com wrote:
A question to tradema...@apache.org will yield an answer quickly if anyone
needs to know.
Thanks. I will subscribe
Hi Rob,
Thanks.
On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 9:21 PM, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote:
If you are looking for permission to use the trademarks, then you
should follow the instructions here:
http://incubator.apache.org/openofficeorg/trademarks.html
The PPMC approves first, and then sends to
2011/11/26 Kazunari Hirano khir...@gmail.com:
Hi Rob,
Thanks.
On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 9:44 PM, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote:
Maybe think of it this way; Kentucky Fried Chicken decided to rebrand
itself as KFC because the wanted to deemphasize the fried part,
for modern
Hi Rob,
Thanks.
On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 9:44 PM, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote:
Maybe think of it this way; Kentucky Fried Chicken decided to rebrand
itself as KFC because the wanted to deemphasize the fried part,
for modern health-conscious consumers. But that doesn't meant that
Hi Shane, Jim and all,
Thanks.
On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 2:41 AM, Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com wrote:
On Nov 17, 2011, at 7:24 AM, Kazunari Hirano wrote:
If we (Apache) use OpenOffice as product name and Apache OpenOffice as
project name, then we can give Team OOo the OpenOffice.org brand
On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 6:03 AM, Kazunari Hirano khir...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Shane, Jim and all,
Thanks.
On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 2:41 AM, Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com wrote:
On Nov 17, 2011, at 7:24 AM, Kazunari Hirano wrote:
If we (Apache) use OpenOffice as product name and Apache
On Nov 17, 2011, at 7:24 AM, Kazunari Hirano wrote:
If we (Apache) use OpenOffice as product name and Apache OpenOffice as
project name, then we can give Team OOo the OpenOffice.org brand and
trademark?
Why would we want to? You don't reward bad behavior so even
if the ASF did want to
On 11/17/11 7:15 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
Both Stefan and Martin have iCLAs on file. Both signed up on the Incubator
Proposal as Initial Committers. Stefan completed the process to be established
as a committer. He is also eligible to be on the PPMC.
I thought I did also, but maybe I
Martin,
On Nov 16, 2011, at 11:51 PM, Dave Fisher wrote:
On Nov 16, 2011, at 12:39 PM, Shane Curcuru wrote:
On 2011-11-16 3:26 PM, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
Hi Martin;
--- On Wed, 11/16/11, Martin Hollmichel wrote:
...
On 11/16/11 6:33 PM, Ross Gardler wrote:
On 16 November 2011 16:56,
On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 3:17 AM, Dave Fisher dave2w...@comcast.net wrote:
Martin,
On Nov 16, 2011, at 11:51 PM, Dave Fisher wrote:
On Nov 16, 2011, at 12:39 PM, Shane Curcuru wrote:
On 2011-11-16 3:26 PM, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
Hi Martin;
--- On Wed, 11/16/11, Martin Hollmichel
Hi all,
On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 9:10 PM, Donald Harbison dpharbi...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 3:17 AM, Dave Fisher dave2w...@comcast.net wrote:
Martin,
On Nov 16, 2011, at 11:51 PM, Dave Fisher wrote:
On Nov 16, 2011, at 12:39 PM, Shane Curcuru wrote:
On 2011-11-16
On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 2:51 AM, Dave Fisher dave2w...@comcast.net wrote:
On Nov 16, 2011, at 12:39 PM, Shane Curcuru wrote:
On 2011-11-16 3:26 PM, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
Hi Martin;
--- On Wed, 11/16/11, Martin Hollmichel wrote:
...
On 11/16/11 6:33 PM, Ross Gardler wrote:
On 16 November
On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 7:24 AM, Kazunari Hirano khir...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi all,
On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 9:10 PM, Donald Harbison dpharbi...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 3:17 AM, Dave Fisher dave2w...@comcast.net
wrote:
Martin,
On Nov 16, 2011, at 11:51 PM, Dave Fisher
On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 7:24 AM, Kazunari Hirano khir...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi all,
On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 9:10 PM, Donald Harbison dpharbi...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 3:17 AM, Dave Fisher dave2w...@comcast.net wrote:
Martin,
On Nov 16, 2011, at 11:51 PM, Dave Fisher wrote:
On 2011-11-17 7:24 AM, Kazunari Hirano wrote:
...snip...
If we (Apache) use OpenOffice as product name and Apache OpenOffice as
project name, then we can give Team OOo the OpenOffice.org brand and
trademark?
No, the ASF will not do that.
- Shane, VP, Brand Management
Hi Rob and all,
On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 10:23 PM, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote:
I don't think so. Part of protecting a brand is to prevent confusing
similarity., For example, we could not go out and sell soft drinks
under the name Coca-Cola.org or pizza under the name Pizza
Hut.net.
I
On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 8:56 AM, Kazunari Hirano khir...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Rob and all,
On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 10:23 PM, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote:
I don't think so. Part of protecting a brand is to prevent confusing
similarity., For example, we could not go out and sell soft
Hi,
Am 17.11.2011 08:51, schrieb Dave Fisher:
What is difficult for me to understand is that both Stefan Taxhet and Martin
Hollmichel
signed up as Initial Committers to the Apache project, but have never signed an
iCLA.
Martin and I sent signed iCLAs to secretary@
Is there a page where
On Nov 17, 2011, at 4:30 AM, Tim Williams wrote:
On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 2:51 AM, Dave Fisher dave2w...@comcast.net wrote:
On Nov 16, 2011, at 12:39 PM, Shane Curcuru wrote:
On 2011-11-16 3:26 PM, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
Hi Martin;
--- On Wed, 11/16/11, Martin Hollmichel wrote:
...
On
Hi Rob and all,
On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 11:02 PM, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote:
And that is fine. A trademark is for a particular category of
product. The Japanese trademark is not for personal productivity
applications. It is possible for the same name to be used in
different
Both Stefan and Martin have iCLAs on file. Both signed up on the Incubator
Proposal as Initial Committers. Stefan completed the process to be established
as a committer. He is also eligible to be on the PPMC.
Communication and administrative delays, sometimes mine, often arise in the
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 5:31 AM, Martin Hollmichel
martin.hollmic...@googlemail.com wrote:
On 11/15/11 6:46 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
I have been mulling this over for a long time...
Up to now, we have been reactionary. We have allowed others to
control and distort the message, paint things
On Nov 15, 2011, at 3:57 PM, Ross Gardler wrote:
On 15 November 2011 18:31, Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com wrote:
Why the AL is important for such a standard
such as Open Office and ODF;
Hey, we can even quote Stallman there.
I'm not sure I'm +1 on an open letter or not. I certainly
On 16 November 2011 12:42, Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com wrote:
On Nov 15, 2011, at 3:57 PM, Ross Gardler wrote:
On 15 November 2011 18:31, Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com wrote:
Why the AL is important for such a standard
such as Open Office and ODF;
Hey, we can even quote Stallman
On 11/16/11 1:15 PM, Donald Harbison wrote:
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 5:31 AM, Martin Hollmichel
martin.hollmic...@googlemail.com wrote:
On 11/15/11 6:46 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
I have been mulling this over for a long time...
Up to now, we have been reactionary. We have allowed others to
Hi Martin;
--- On Wed, 11/16/11, Martin Hollmichel wrote:
...
On 11/16/11 6:33 PM, Ross Gardler wrote:
On 16 November 2011 16:56, Martin Hollmichel
martin.hollmic...@googlemail.com
wrote:
...
What kind of a release are you talking about. OOo
releases can only be made from the
On 2011-11-16 3:26 PM, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
Hi Martin;
--- On Wed, 11/16/11, Martin Hollmichel wrote:
...
On 11/16/11 6:33 PM, Ross Gardler wrote:
On 16 November 2011 16:56, Martin Hollmichel
martin.hollmic...@googlemail.com
wrote:
...
What kind of a release are you talking about. OOo
I just want to make one observation that is critical to understanding
how Apache projects work:
On 2011-11-16 11:56 AM, Martin Hollmichel wrote:
...snip...
The coding work we've done in the 3.3.1 is about some security and
bugfixing issues,
Martin
I would strongly urge everyone here to read
On Nov 16, 2011, at 12:39 PM, Shane Curcuru wrote:
On 2011-11-16 3:26 PM, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
Hi Martin;
--- On Wed, 11/16/11, Martin Hollmichel wrote:
...
On 11/16/11 6:33 PM, Ross Gardler wrote:
On 16 November 2011 16:56, Martin Hollmichel
martin.hollmic...@googlemail.com
wrote:
I have been mulling this over for a long time...
Up to now, we have been reactionary. We have allowed others to
control and distort the message, paint things as a us vs. them
battle (simply to position themselves for personal gain in the
whole debacle), and foster FUD to the clear harm of the
On 15 Nov 2011, at 09:46, Jim Jagielski wrote:
I have been mulling this over for a long time...
Up to now, we have been reactionary. We have allowed others to
control and distort the message, paint things as a us vs. them
battle (simply to position themselves for personal gain in the
On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 12:46 PM, Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com wrote:
I have been mulling this over for a long time...
Up to now, we have been reactionary. We have allowed others to
control and distort the message, paint things as a us vs. them
battle (simply to position themselves for
On Nov 15, 2011, at 1:02 PM, Simon Phipps wrote:
Who are your targets, Jim?
I believe I mentioned them in the original post... In summary:
the entire Open Office ecosystem.
On Nov 15, 2011, at 1:03 PM, Rob Weir wrote:
On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 12:46 PM, Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com wrote:
I have been mulling this over for a long time...
Up to now, we have been reactionary. We have allowed others to
control and distort the message, paint things as a us vs.
Jim,
I'd be happy to help draft this and promote it. As you may know, I've
been wanting to send such a letter, anyway, and have independently
been making efforts to communicate to the ecosystems (note plural).
Further, as I was fairly instrumental in setting many of these up and
certainly in
On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 7:26 PM, Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com wrote:
On Nov 15, 2011, at 1:02 PM, Simon Phipps wrote:
Who are your targets, Jim?
I believe I mentioned them in the original post... In summary:
the entire Open Office ecosystem.
I think we must show ooo power by doing
Hi,
On 15 November 2011 13:31, Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com wrote:
Partly, I can see a number of FUDisms to address. Like there are
only 2 main players within the Open Office ecosystem (Apache and
TDF) and that people need to choose between one or the other;
that the various versions
On Nov 15, 2011, at 1:30 PM, Christian Grobmeier wrote:
On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 7:26 PM, Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com wrote:
On Nov 15, 2011, at 1:02 PM, Simon Phipps wrote:
Who are your targets, Jim?
I believe I mentioned them in the original post... In summary:
the entire Open
On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 1:30 PM, Christian Grobmeier
grobme...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 7:26 PM, Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com wrote:
On Nov 15, 2011, at 1:02 PM, Simon Phipps wrote:
Who are your targets, Jim?
I believe I mentioned them in the original post... In summary:
is always a good idea to have a constant message with the public. also
from a recruiting point of view. i would suggest to highlight the
trully openness of the project and also the engineering tasks that we
are aiming.
i think the community has also grown and is time to start communicate
its
Louis,
On Nov 15, 2011, at 10:37 AM, Louis Suárez-Potts wrote:
Jim,
I'd be happy to help draft this and promote it. As you may know, I've
been wanting to send such a letter, anyway, and have independently
been making efforts to communicate to the ecosystems (note plural).
Further, as I
great but we need to get more people from NLCs and forums and others involved.
On 11/15/11, Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com wrote:
On Nov 15, 2011, at 1:02 PM, Simon Phipps wrote:
Who are your targets, Jim?
I believe I mentioned them in the original post... In summary:
the entire Open
Hi,
On 15 November 2011 14:38, Dave Fisher dave2w...@comcast.net wrote:
Louis,
On Nov 15, 2011, at 10:37 AM, Louis Suárez-Potts wrote:
Jim,
I'd be happy to help draft this and promote it. As you may know, I've
been wanting to send such a letter, anyway, and have independently
been
On 15 November 2011 14:41, Alexandro Colorado j...@openoffice.org wrote:
great but we need to get more people from NLCs and forums and others involved.
Then let's do what we did before, and start with the flakes left over
from the avalanche and once again build a true and open community.
Keep
On 15 November 2011 19:58, Louis Suárez-Potts lsuarezpo...@gmail.comwrote:
On 15 November 2011 14:41, Alexandro Colorado j...@openoffice.org wrote:
great but we need to get more people from NLCs and forums and others
involved.
Then let's do what we did before, and start with the flakes left
On 15 November 2011 18:31, Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com wrote:
Why the AL is important for such a standard
such as Open Office and ODF;
Hey, we can even quote Stallman there.
I'm not sure I'm +1 on an open letter or not. I certainly like Rob's
manifesto/top ten type idea. I'm not sure we
On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 12:57 PM, Ross Gardler
rgard...@opendirective.comwrote:
On 15 November 2011 18:31, Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com wrote:
Why the AL is important for such a standard
such as Open Office and ODF;
Hey, we can even quote Stallman there.
I'm not sure I'm +1 on an open
On 15 November 2011 21:03, Danese Cooper dan...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 12:57 PM, Ross Gardler
rgard...@opendirective.comwrote:
On 15 November 2011 18:31, Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com wrote:
Why the AL is important for such a standard
such as Open Office and ODF;
Hey,
On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 1:31 PM, Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com wrote:
On Nov 15, 2011, at 1:03 PM, Rob Weir wrote:
On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 12:46 PM, Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com wrote:
I have been mulling this over for a long time...
Up to now, we have been reactionary. We have allowed
85 matches
Mail list logo
