from:"Dennis E. Hamilton"

I don't think deleting the files of the Symphony contribution is a constructive 
step.

Cleaning up the IPR will work for everyone.

When can the ASF expect the letter from IBM that you have offered to request?

 - Dennis

-Original Message-
From: Rob Weir [mailto:robw...@apache.org] 
Sent: Tuesday, October 09, 2012 10:30
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS]: next step towards graduation

[ ... ]

> Offering to remove the files is bizarre.  What is that, slash-dot bait?
>

No, I'm serious.  If this is a blocking issue for anyone, I'm willing,
able and happy to delete. I wouldn't want anyone concerned about
"toxic files" in SVN.  When Pedro had concerns with the Cat-b  files
in SVN he was praised for his "axe".  I'm just offering to use mine as
well.

-Rob

[ ... ]

RE: [DISCUSS]: next step towards graduation

I'm sorry, Rob.  Those files are toxic *for me*.  I can't touch them in their 
present state.  I also don't want to read them in their present state until the 
provenance and permissive licensing is dealt with.  

What is irrelevant for you is not irrelevant for me.  And you're not my lawyer. 

Offering to remove the files is bizarre.  What is that, slash-dot bait?

 - Dennis

PS: I was asked, shortly after AOO incubation started, why I did not contribute 
to LibreOffice.  My response to that private question was that I do contribute 
at a level that does not require my working with the LibreOffice code.  As a 
permissive-license open-source developer I have no interest in possible 
contamination of my own work by knowledge of something under LGPL, GPL, any 
other reciprocal license and in particular anything that is proprietary.  (I 
avoid the proprietary problem by not signing NDAs unless they are reciprocal 
and it is something I have no difficulty keeping in confidence.)

[Full disclosure: To be accurate, I did contribute one (unused) patch to 
LibreOffice and I also provided private review of a patch that has been 
released in LibreOffice for reducing the information leakage and ease of 
known-plaintext attacks on encrypted (save with Password) ODF files.  I also 
realize that I could privately rely on Symphony code, but I could not produce 
anything based on it since I can't provide sanitary provenance.  Sanitary 
provenance is a standard I must satisfy for myself.]

-Original Message-
From: Rob Weir [mailto:robw...@apache.org] 
Sent: Tuesday, October 09, 2012 09:14
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS]: next step towards graduation

On Tue, Oct 9, 2012 at 11:57 AM, Dennis E. Hamilton  wrote:
> Besides the concerns of the IPMC over toxic IPR in the SVN for an extended 
> time, the greatest difficulty I see is that no one on the project can touch 
> this code or work on merging any useful bits until the IPR cleanup happens.  
> At the moment, it appears that the entire Symphony subdirectory on the OOO 
> SVN is untouchable.
>

Dennis, your use of inflammatory language like "toxic" is not helpful.
  The only parts that are of interest to this project are the IBM
enhancements and new features, and these are all under ALv2 per the
SGA.  The legacy OpenOffice.org stuff, with LGPL headers, is
irrelevant.

What we have is contributed code that is sitting in a segregated tree,
entirely separate from the product code, awaiting IP clearance.  This
is within the process.  If you or any one else wants the process to go
faster I'd be happy to suggest ways to help.   And as I said before,
I'm also happy to delete this tree, if anyone thinks it is a problem.

-Rob

>  - Dennis
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Dave Fisher [mailto:dave2w...@comcast.net]
> Sent: Monday, October 08, 2012 23:36
> To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS]: next step towards graduation
>
>
> On Oct 8, 2012, at 9:06 AM, Rob Weir wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Oct 8, 2012 at 10:59 AM, Dennis E. Hamilton  
>> wrote:
> [ ... ]
>>> I nose around in the Symphony code from time to time and I notice there is 
>>> no reflection of the grant and availability under ALv2 has occurred.
>>>
>>
>> We were notified that the grant was received.
>>
>>> Is it expected that something be done about that?  There are files that are
>>>
>>>  - still under Sun LGPL license,
>>>  - some that add an IBM License and copyright under private license
>>>  - some that claim an IBM Copyright and provide no license whatsoever,
>>>although there is a notice concerning government use
>>>
>>
>> Yes, this needs to be cleaned up before any of this is part of a
>> release.  But it is not a graduation issue.  Remember, an SGA may come
>> from anywhere, at any time, before graduation or after graduation.
>> This is blessing, not a problem.  But the code does need to be
>> reviewed and brought in line with policy before it can be part of a
>> release.
>
> It is still work that ought to be done sooner rather than later. And the 
> header work should be done by someone from IBM. Who might that be?
>
> Whoever it is should be doing it already. There is no excuse to delay.
>
> BTW - Large software grants go through the incubator. TLPs do this. [1]
>
> I think that not clearing the Symphony grant might be a graduation problem 
> for some on the IPMC. It will certainly be discussed.
>
> Regards,
> Dave
>
> [1] http://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/index.html
>
> [ ... ]
>

RE: [DISCUSS]: next step towards graduation

@Rob,

Yes, please arrange to have that permission provided to the ASF, so that anyone 
ASF designates can make the changes.

I suspect that will come to the [P]PMC to be accountable for its accomplishment.

It would be helpful if the permission allows removal of the IBM Copyright 
notice or some other simplification that removes the limitations in the current 
notice.  Specifying any notice that IBM requires for acknowledging the presence 
of code contributed by IBM would be useful.

 - Dennis

MORE DETAILS

I don't allow myself to get very deep into code that does not have permissive 
licenses, but I can see from looking at notices in the Symphony contribution 
that the task will be an interesting one.  Apart from code that is customized 
to Symphony, there is a significant quantity of Sun LGPLed material that 
duplicates what may be since-maintained code already in AOOi and under ALv2.  
This part of the scrubbing will be an interesting challenge when the 
corresponding file in AOO is more-recent and contains changes not in the 
Symphony version. 

This text file lays it out quite clearly:

<http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/ooo/symphony/trunk/README>

If the idea is to keep the Symphony branch buildable or at least to have the 
improvements in Symphony still functional, there has to be some degree of 
replacement of Symphony code with the corresponding code on ooo/trunk or at 
least one of the stable ooo/tags/AOO34x.  That takes care of the LGPL bits.  If 
there is also code originating in a CWS that is not integrated into the AOO 
SVN, that will need to be dealt with too.  Finally, dealing with the additional 
IBM Copyright notices and changes where there is no substitute in AOO ALv2 code 
should proceed in the usual manner of SGA IPR cleanup.  Then determining merges 
into AOO can proceed.

This is a significant undertaking that would have also been required if AOO 
were rebased on Symphony, rather than the course the project has taken.  I 
think it is further evidence for the prudence of the chosen course, which did 
not disrupt a steady progression of AOO[i] releases.

-Original Message-
From: Rob Weir [mailto:robw...@apache.org] 
Sent: Tuesday, October 09, 2012 05:57
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS]: next step towards graduation

On Tue, Oct 9, 2012 at 8:23 AM, Dave Fisher  wrote:
>
> On Oct 9, 2012, at 3:56 AM, Rob Weir wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Oct 9, 2012 at 2:35 AM, Dave Fisher  wrote:
>>>
>>> On Oct 8, 2012, at 9:06 AM, Rob Weir wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Mon, Oct 8, 2012 at 10:59 AM, Dennis E. Hamilton  
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> The proposed PMC chair is not an officer of the PPMC.  The PPMC has no 
>>>>> chair.
>>>>>
>>>>> I suppose the updated graduation resolution would need to be balloted 
>>>>> here.  Then the IPMC can vote on it on their list for graduation.
>>>>>
>>>>> Also, all of the things that a PPMC is supposed to have been done need to 
>>>>> be checked off somewhere - on the podling status page, I expect.
>>>>>
>>>>> Meanwhile ...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Different question.
>>>>>
>>>>> I nose around in the Symphony code from time to time and I notice there 
>>>>> is no reflection of the grant and availability under ALv2 has occurred.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> We were notified that the grant was received.
>>>>
>>>>> Is it expected that something be done about that?  There are files that 
>>>>> are
>>>>>
>>>>> - still under Sun LGPL license,
>>>>> - some that add an IBM License and copyright under private license
>>>>> - some that claim an IBM Copyright and provide no license whatsoever,
>>>>>   although there is a notice concerning government use
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Yes, this needs to be cleaned up before any of this is part of a
>>>> release.  But it is not a graduation issue.  Remember, an SGA may come
>>>> from anywhere, at any time, before graduation or after graduation.
>>>> This is blessing, not a problem.  But the code does need to be
>>>> reviewed and brought in line with policy before it can be part of a
>>>> release.
>>>
>>> It is still work that ought to be done sooner rather than later. And the 
>>> header work should be done by someone from IBM. Who might that be?
>>>
>>
>> If you recall we had a discussion a while ago on what to do with the
>> Symphony code.  One proposal was to adopt it as the new trunk and move
>> quickly to releasing it.

RE: [DISCUSS]: next step towards graduation

Besides the concerns of the IPMC over toxic IPR in the SVN for an extended 
time, the greatest difficulty I see is that no one on the project can touch 
this code or work on merging any useful bits until the IPR cleanup happens.  At 
the moment, it appears that the entire Symphony subdirectory on the OOO SVN is 
untouchable.

 - Dennis

-Original Message-
From: Dave Fisher [mailto:dave2w...@comcast.net] 
Sent: Monday, October 08, 2012 23:36
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS]: next step towards graduation

On Oct 8, 2012, at 9:06 AM, Rob Weir wrote:

> On Mon, Oct 8, 2012 at 10:59 AM, Dennis E. Hamilton  wrote:
[ ... ]
>> I nose around in the Symphony code from time to time and I notice there is 
>> no reflection of the grant and availability under ALv2 has occurred.
>> 
> 
> We were notified that the grant was received.
> 
>> Is it expected that something be done about that?  There are files that are
>> 
>>  - still under Sun LGPL license,
>>  - some that add an IBM License and copyright under private license
>>  - some that claim an IBM Copyright and provide no license whatsoever,
>>although there is a notice concerning government use
>> 
> 
> Yes, this needs to be cleaned up before any of this is part of a
> release.  But it is not a graduation issue.  Remember, an SGA may come
> from anywhere, at any time, before graduation or after graduation.
> This is blessing, not a problem.  But the code does need to be
> reviewed and brought in line with policy before it can be part of a
> release.

It is still work that ought to be done sooner rather than later. And the header 
work should be done by someone from IBM. Who might that be?

Whoever it is should be doing it already. There is no excuse to delay.

BTW - Large software grants go through the incubator. TLPs do this. [1]

I think that not clearing the Symphony grant might be a graduation problem for 
some on the IPMC. It will certainly be discussed.

Regards,
Dave

[1] http://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/index.html

[ ... ]

RE: [DISCUSS]: next step towards graduation

2012-10-08 Thread Dennis E. Hamilton

Clumsy sentence repair:  

I notice in the Symphony code that there is no reflection of the Symphony 
grant.  Replacement of headers by ALv2 notices has not occurred.  Incompatible 
license notices and closed-source proprietary notices continue to appear among 
the files.

-Original Message-
From: Dennis E. Hamilton [mailto:orc...@apache.org] 
Sent: Monday, October 08, 2012 08:00
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: RE: [DISCUSS]: next step towards graduation

The proposed PMC chair is not an officer of the PPMC.  The PPMC has no chair.  

I suppose the updated graduation resolution would need to be balloted here.  
Then the IPMC can vote on it on their list for graduation.

Also, all of the things that a PPMC is supposed to have been done need to be 
checked off somewhere - on the podling status page, I expect.

Meanwhile ...


Different question. 

I nose around in the Symphony code from time to time and I notice there is no 
reflection of the grant and availability under ALv2 has occurred.  

Is it expected that something be done about that?  There are files that are 

  - still under Sun LGPL license, 
  - some that add an IBM License and copyright under private license
  - some that claim an IBM Copyright and provide no license whatsoever,
although there is a notice concerning government use

 - Dennis

-Original Message-
From: Jürgen Schmidt [mailto:jogischm...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Monday, October 08, 2012 04:45
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: [DISCUSS]: next step towards graduation

Hi,

we made good progress towards graduation and I would like to discuss the
next steps.

- we have selected the initial PMC roster
- we have selected a PMC chair (vote finished, result summary out
standing but we have a clear vote for Andrea Pescetti)
- graduation resolution already updated with PMC roster and preliminary
with the PMC chair

Next steps to reach potentially the October board meeting:
- start IPMC vote, who will trigger this? Should it or have it be
triggered by the new PMC chair?

I hope we can start this IPMC vote on Tuesday or Wednesday latest.
Anything else we need?

Juergen

RE: [DISCUSS]: next step towards graduation

2012-10-08 Thread Dennis E. Hamilton

The proposed PMC chair is not an officer of the PPMC.  The PPMC has no chair.  

I suppose the updated graduation resolution would need to be balloted here.  
Then the IPMC can vote on it on their list for graduation.

Also, all of the things that a PPMC is supposed to have been done need to be 
checked off somewhere - on the podling status page, I expect.

Meanwhile ...


Different question. 

I nose around in the Symphony code from time to time and I notice there is no 
reflection of the grant and availability under ALv2 has occurred.  

Is it expected that something be done about that?  There are files that are 

  - still under Sun LGPL license, 
  - some that add an IBM License and copyright under private license
  - some that claim an IBM Copyright and provide no license whatsoever,
although there is a notice concerning government use

 - Dennis

-Original Message-
From: Jürgen Schmidt [mailto:jogischm...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Monday, October 08, 2012 04:45
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: [DISCUSS]: next step towards graduation

Hi,

we made good progress towards graduation and I would like to discuss the
next steps.

- we have selected the initial PMC roster
- we have selected a PMC chair (vote finished, result summary out
standing but we have a clear vote for Andrea Pescetti)
- graduation resolution already updated with PMC roster and preliminary
with the PMC chair

Next steps to reach potentially the October board meeting:
- start IPMC vote, who will trigger this? Should it or have it be
triggered by the new PMC chair?

I hope we can start this IPMC vote on Tuesday or Wednesday latest.
Anything else we need?

Juergen

New committer: Chen Peng

2012-10-07 Thread Dennis E. Hamilton

The Apache OpenOffice PPMC announces the addition of committer
Chen Peng, pengch@ apache.org

The list of all current podling committers is at:
.

Committers have a defined role in the workings of the Apache Software
Foundation: .

For new committers:

First, please read through the "Guide for New Committers":
http://www.apache.org/dev/new-committers-guide.html There is some
useful information there related to email, security, etc.

Secondly, you can control your profile and settings by using your
Apache User ID and password, supplied for your Apache account,
to log on to . There you can change your
password to one of your choosing. In addition, please add the
other e-mail addresses that you want to be known by. If you want
to change the forwarding of e-mail in the future, use
the profile to accomplish that.

Next, please add an entry for yourself on this project page:
http://incubator.apache.org/openofficeorg/people.html

Now that you are a committer, this is a good opportunity for you to
make your first commit, editing that page. The simplest way is to use
the Apache CMS to edit this page via the web:

http://incubator.apache.org/openofficeorg/website-local.html#using-the-apache-cms-bookmarklet-simpler-method

Finally, you are now authorized to make commits to the Apache
OpenOffice SVN repository and other repositories established
for committers. Use the https: version of the SVN URL. Your
Apache ID and password will be required on your first commit.
Use options to retain your credentials for future commits if
appropriate.

- the Apache OpenOffice PPMC

RE: OpenOffice SVG vector graphics

2012-10-06 Thread Dennis E. Hamilton

I think the OP is asking about printed forms, as on a bumper sticker.  Since 
they are presumably enlarged, the provision of trademark information in small 
but readable type at/around the margin would probably work.

 - Dennis

-Original Message-
From: acolor...@gmail.com [mailto:acolor...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Alexandro 
Colorado
Sent: Saturday, October 06, 2012 09:28
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: OpenOffice SVG vector graphics

On 10/6/12, Guy Waterval  wrote:
> Hi Alexandro,
> Hi all,
>
> 2012/10/6 Alexandro Colorado 
>
>> I upload the OpenOffice SVG logo on pure SVG, still needs some cleanup
>> on the nodes, but this is a 100% SVG logo.
>> The attachment is on the cWiki:
>>
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/download/attachments/27834483/ApacheOpenOfficeTM.svg
>> &
>>
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpageattachments.action?pageId=27834483&sortBy=date&;
>
>
> Many thanks for your work, it's appreciated.
> Please, could you tell me how to reuse properly your work or any free logo
> of this type ?.
> In a book there is no problem, a notice"Credits" can tell the author and
> license of the work.
> But in other cases of use, as a banner on a car or as poster, how to do to
> give credit of the reused work ? I see only the possibility to add a line
> with the corresponding informations.

SVG is an XML program and support Metadata, which is extra information
on the work.

Inkscape support such metadata including a series of documents.
http://wiki.creativecommons.org/images/4/47/Inkscape-0.44SVN-metadata.png

> A+
> --
> gw
>


-- 
Alexandro Colorado
PPMC Apache OpenOffice
http://es.openoffice.org

RE: Ask for advice:cloud office interoperability

2012-10-05 Thread Dennis E. Hamilton

Shortly after the publication of ODF 1.0, there were claims by some that ODF 
was a universal format and that MSFT should simply adopt it, because as a 
universal format, ODF can certainly carry anything that Microsoft Office then 
carried in its binary formats.  This was also a factor in the argument that 
OOXML was not needed at the ISO level since ODF was there already.

As far as I can tell, that was some sort of magical thinking.  It completely 
ignored the reality of document models and what they do and do not afford as an 
expression of the documents of users.  It completely ignored the prospect that 
document models can be so disparate that their perfect bidirectional mapping is 
not only impractical but unknown.  

There is no indication that ODF of any version is a universal format in the 
sense that it is practical for all products to target it as a common 
interchange format.  

More to the point, there is no evidence that there is a practical universal 
format. 

Something else to consider: ODF is not the same as OpenOffice.  There are 
divergent implementations of ODF (even ignoring however close Microsoft comes, 
but however close Microsoft comes is practically of great importance).  There 
is no known *complete* implementation of ODF anywhere, ignoring the features 
that ODF does not even address or that leaves completely open to 
implementation-dependent variation.

I favor ODF being perfected.  That is not a simple matter.  The OASIS ODF TC 
is, in my opinion, currently denting its spears on providing an understandable 
change-tracking mechanism that hurdles the bar set by current practice and user 
expectations.  The current direction is to abandon the change-tracking as it is 
currently, though imperfectly, specified.  

Meanwhile there is *no* scripting language or macro provision in ODF.  There is 
no provision for extensions in ODF (and having a platform-independent one of 
those would be quite remarkable).  These are all very practical problems that 
are very difficult to reconcile at a document-format standardization level.  

Work at the ODF TC is not that much different than working on an open-source 
project.  There have to be individuals who come to OASIS that can tolerant 
working on standards and that can make useful contributions.  Saying what could 
or should happen without there being appropriate capability brought to the ODF 
TC is not going to accomplish anything.

I favor ODF as a document format.  It is necessary to be realistic about what 
can happen in its improvement and stabilization as a practical matter.

 - Dennis 

PS: I agree with the remark of Yong Lin Ma.  The way to understand the 
difficulties in reconciling formats is to deal with the details involved in 
order to improve AOO's interoperability with OOXML.  It is tedious work in the 
trenches that will calibrate the areas of feature harmony and the places where 
bridging model incompatibility is intractable.

-Original Message-
From: Ian Lynch [mailto:ianrly...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Friday, October 05, 2012 08:13
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: Ask for advice:cloud office interoperability

On 5 October 2012 13:28, Yong Lin Ma  wrote:

> That is an nice expectation.
>
> What do you suggest the AOO community do except improving AOO's
> interoperability with ooxml?
>
>
> On Fri, Oct 5, 2012 at 8:18 PM, zhun guo  wrote:
> > To Yong Lin Ma,my proposal is to get all office software to be convenient
> > for common user, include native office software or cloud office
> software. I
> > like ODF,OOXML,PDF or HTML. And you?
>
>
For me I'd like to see convergence to a single XML based open standard that
supported full data fidelity when transferring information between editors
whether on line, desktop or mobile. This is quite a long way off but odf
could be the starting point to get there. Other than MSFT I can't see
anyone wanting to adopt OOXML as the native format in other non-microsoft
products for fear of lock-in and intellectual property issues. MSFT shows
no sign of replacing OOXML with odf so probably getting very good filters
between odf and OOXML is the best hope. If that was achieved it would make
sense for any new software to use one of those two formats as its default
so there would be pressure for convergence.

> Zhun Guo
>
>
>
> --
> Regards
>
> Yong Lin Ma
>

-- 
Ian

Ofqual Accredited IT Qualifications (The Schools ITQ)

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

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

RE: ApacheconEU2012

2012-10-05 Thread Dennis E. Hamilton

My impression is that the student is requesting travel assistance, not 
admission assistance.

Catriona, will you be more specific about what you are requesting and the 
amount involved.  There is an application form that Oliver can provide 
information about.

 - Dennis

-Original Message-
From: Oliver-Rainer Wittmann [mailto:orwittm...@googlemail.com] 
Sent: Friday, October 05, 2012 00:35
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org; cawh...@sctelco.net.au
Subject: Re: ApacheconEU2012

Hi Catriona,

Ross is correct.
As a student it makes much more sense to take the student ticket for 75,- EUR.
This is much less than the regular ticket minus AOO ticket discount which would 
be 500,- EUR (600 minus 100).
Visit http://www.apachecon.eu/tickets/ for the student ticket.

Best regards, Oliver.

On 05.10.2012 08:58, Ross Gardler wrote:
> As a student you're entitled tithe student rate of 75 EUR. See the tickets
> page of the website.
>
> Sent from my tablet
> On Oct 5, 2012 7:32 AM, "catriona"  wrote:
>
>> Dear sir/Madam,
>> My name is Catriona White, I am currently a full-time student in South
>> Australia.
>> I am a Apache Open Office community member and recently received an
>> invitation to
>> attend the Conference in Sinsheim, Germany.
>> As I am a student my finances are slight, so I am applying for support to
>> attend
>> the conference on the 5th-8th November.
>> Please consider my request for a ticket discount as I would love to travel
>> to Germany
>> for the conference.
>>
>> Yours Sincerely,
>>
>> Catriona White
>> mobile 0427253391
>>
>>
>>
>

RE: Ask for advice:cloud office interoperability

2012-10-05 Thread Dennis E. Hamilton

I don't understand what problem it is expected that use of HTML will solve.

Are you suggesting that HTML[5] can become a common/universal interchange 
format.
Do you consider ePub a candidate?  

Note that even using Webkit as a common support for presentation of documents 
to users does not assure anything about interchange of the document files.  

I am puzzled.

How is HTML related to the problems of interchange among desktop office 
document formats?

 - Dennis

-Original Message-
From: zhun guo [mailto:mike5...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Friday, October 05, 2012 01:23
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org; orc...@apache.org
Subject: Re: Ask for advice:cloud office interoperability

To Dennis, why not consider about HTML ?

Zhun Guo

RE: Ask for advice:cloud office interoperability

2012-10-04 Thread Dennis E. Hamilton

I don't understand.

Microsoft began supporting ODF 1.0 in Office 2007 (SP2 I think).

They also support ODF 1.0 in Office 2010.

In Office 2013/365 there is support for ODF 1.2, including with support of 
OpenFormula in Excel.

There are now three ways to consider interoperability among Office and 
OpenOffice users - via Office Binary Formats, via OOXML, and via ODF 1.2.

Also, the support for ODF documents is now extending to the Web version of 
Word, Excel, and PowerPoint in the SkyDrive cloud service.  That provides a 
more-limited but useful potential for interchange, at least for the browsers 
that SkyDrive supports with Office Web access.

I assume that there is not full agreement of functionality.  

I think now is time to see how successful interchange can be.  Then learn where 
are the best areas for improvement.

I agree that this interoperability is very important.  It is not easy.  Not 
even if everyone is eager and willing.

 - Dennis 

-Original Message-
From: zhun guo [mailto:mike5...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, October 04, 2012 19:30
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: Ask for advice:cloud office interoperability

to Juergen, Microsoft will never support ODF. But Microsoft's market share
is 95%. We must cooperate with Microsoft.
Which all company support is HTML . So it is the only format ,with it all
the company can interoperate?

Zhun Guo

2012/10/4 Jürgen Schmidt 

> On 10/4/12 4:06 PM, zhun guo wrote:
> > Hi,all,Joost not knew our means. We means ,how to solve the problem,the
> > difficult of ODF interoperate with OOXML ,which Ian Lynch had met. this
> is
> > for native office software.
> > *The second , cloud office documents company also face the same
> > question,  *Google Docs，Microsoft Office 365，Zoho，苹果icloud，Adobe
> > Acrobat.com
> > ，ThinkFree ，Cisco WebEx
> > WebOffice
> > ，IBM Docs  ,etc, use ODF,OOXML,PDF,HTML .  Then how to interoperate with
> > each other?
>
> by supporting one really open standard like ODF ;-) And work together on
> improvements or enhancements where necessary. Online editors are tools
> that work on docs in an cloud storage and desktop clients like AOO can
> access these docs as well. The question is more how collaborative
> editing on ODF can be managed in a way that online editors as well as
> desktop clients can use it. It probably don't have to be a completely
> new format.
>
> Juergen
>
>
> >
> > Zhun Guo
> >
> >
> > 2012/10/2 Joost Andrae 
> >
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> Am 02.10.2012 13:03, schrieb zhun guo:
> >>> Hi,Zhengfan and Ian Lynch,
> >>>  All format office documents' interoperability is important.
> >>> 1. ODF and OOXML, is more concerned about data storage. Microsoft, and
> >>> OpenOffice is the supporter。But we need ODF and OOXML to be  merged to
> a
> >>> new one format. And some wroking are doing 。Otherwise， we should face
> the
> >>> question,just like  Ian Lynch's problem.
> >>> 2. HTML, is more concerned about data revealing。 Google Docs，IBM
> >>> Docs，Microsoft Office 365,Zoho,Think Free,Adobe Acobat, Cisco WebEx
> ,all
> >>> these cloud office documents select the same format.  Maybe it is a new
> >> way
> >>> for office documents interoperability. As Rob Weir ,OASIS OpenDocument
> TC
> >>> chairman,says"
> >>> I find the topic of web editor interoperability very interesting.  It
> >>> is, in many ways, the continuation of the "office interop" battles we
> >>> have fought for the last decade.  But the new technology brings new
> >>> challenges and new opportunities, and perhaps even an opportunity to
> >>> avoid repeating the mistakes of the past!
> >>>"
> >>> ODF? OOXML?PDF?HTML?...I think it is better to choose one format
> for
> >>> documents interoperability,than choose two or three! It is important
> >> ,just
> >>> like ASCII which is the basic for  Information Interchange.
> >>> Do you agree?
> >>
> >> ACSII compared to the characters within a GB18030 font ? This is just
> >> one example why ASCII doesn't work here. UNICODE characters within a XML
> >> based document format is much better for information exchange especially
> >> if you use an application that has been globalized and localized to a
> >> valuable number of languages. And as long as ODF and it's counterparts
> >> are comparable to other document formats then why should there be a new
> >> document format? ODF is ISO and OASIS approved, has been designed for
> >> this purpose and it can be used by everyone. And parts of your ideas
> >> have already been implemented as UOF in China.
> >> Using ODFDOM (http://incubator.apache.org/odftoolkit/) as a basis for
> >> such an application could serve very well as a container to proof
> >> interoperability between applications by using ODF as it's container.
> >>
> >> Kind regards, Joost
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
>
>

RE: [VOTE][PMC] PMC Chair

2012-10-04 Thread Dennis E. Hamilton

[X] Andrea Pescetti (pescetti)

-Original Message-
From: Andrew Rist [mailto:andrew.r...@oracle.com] 
Sent: Thursday, October 04, 2012 16:42
To: ooo-dev
Subject: [VOTE][PMC] PMC Chair

[ ... ][

[ ] Drew Jensen (atjensen)


The [DISCUSS] for this vote can be found at [2] and [3].  Note: Andrea has 
accepted the nomination - Drew has not responded.


[1] http://incubator.apache.org/guides/graduation.html#toplevel
[2]http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-ooo-dev/201210.mbox/%3c506a1e72.20...@oracle.com%3E
[3]http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-ooo-dev/201209.mbox/%3c5064c859.9090...@oracle.com%3E

RE: [WWW] Do we need a new site logo (for graduation) -- call for volunteers

2012-10-03 Thread Dennis E. Hamilton

I notice that Apache Forrest does use the Apache feather: there are three of 
them stood on their quills as if they are a small stand of trees.

It seems to me that the incorporation of the feather can be a little strained.  
The cases where it is in shadow, on the other hand, are easy to overlook.

The orb with stylized gulls is very convenient at a lot of sizes and formats, 
including as a download button, an icon on directory entries on downloaded exe 
and oxt files, etc.  If the feather is to be a feature of that, it will be 
tricky.  

It would be useful to see some examples, as Kay suggests.

 - Dennis

PS: I also wonder whether generic icons should be part of the source release 
and distinct icons be used in the Apache-provided "authentic" builds.  In that 
case, it would be great if the generic icons did not have the feather in any 
way. That's a half-baked notion, and it simply might not be acceptable.  It is 
something I wonder about -- differentiating builds produced by the project from 
ones produced in some other manner and the source only having the generic icons.

-Original Message-
From: Kay Schenk [mailto:kay.sch...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2012 15:30
To: OOo Apache
Subject: [WWW] Do we need a new site logo (for graduation) -- call for 
volunteers

We all love the orb with gulls, but maybe it's time for a slight update 
to our logo? Or the header line on our websites (project and user portal).

I took a look around at some of the Apache projects and the use of 
project logos and web site headers seems to fall into a few different 
categories.

Sites using Apache feather but not in product logo --

http://camel.apache.org/
http://forrest.apache.org/
http://cocoon.apache.org/

Sites incorporating feather logo into an existing logo --

http://mina.apache.org/
http://jakarta.apache.org/oro/
http://axis.apache.org/axis2/java/core/
http://activemq.apache.org/
http://ofbiz.apache.org/ (???)

Sites not making overt use of any Apache logo (feather) --
http://click.apache.org/

So, any preferences? Ideas?

There already exists a AOOLogo proposal page,
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOOLogo+proposal

so we could just add items to this, or change some that are here, or add 
a child page, etc.


-- 

MzK

"Just 'cause you got the monkey off your back
  doesn't mean the circus has left town."
 -- George Carlin

New committer: Shen Feng Liu

The Apache OpenOffice PPMC announces the addition of committer
Shen Feng Liu, liushenfeng@ apache.org

The list of all current podling committers is at:
.

Committers have a defined role in the workings of the Apache Software
Foundation: .

For new committers:

First, please read through the "Guide for New Committers":
http://www.apache.org/dev/new-committers-guide.html There is some
useful information there related to email, security, etc.

Next, please add an entry for yourself on this project page:
http://incubator.apache.org/openofficeorg/people.html

Now that you are a committer, this is a good opportunity for you to
make your first commit, editing that page. The simplest way is to use
the Apache CMS to edit this page via the web:

http://incubator.apache.org/openofficeorg/website-local.html#using-the-apache-cms-bookmarklet-simpler-method

- the Apache OpenOffice PPMC

New committer: Zhu Shan

The Apache OpenOffice PPMC announces the addition of committer
Zhu Shan, shanzhu@ apache.org

The list of all current podling committers is at:
.

Committers have a defined role in the workings of the Apache Software
Foundation: .

For new committers:

First, please read through the "Guide for New Committers":
http://www.apache.org/dev/new-committers-guide.html There is some
useful information there related to email, security, etc.

Next, please add an entry for yourself on this project page:
http://incubator.apache.org/openofficeorg/people.html

Now that you are a committer, this is a good opportunity for you to
make your first commit, editing that page. The simplest way is to use
the Apache CMS to edit this page via the web:

http://incubator.apache.org/openofficeorg/website-local.html#using-the-apache-cms-bookmarklet-simpler-method

- the Apache OpenOffice PPMC

New committer: Zheng Fan

The Apache OpenOffice PPMC announces the addition of committer
Zheng Fan, zhengfan@ apache.org

The list of all current podling committers is at:
.

Committers have a defined role in the workings of the Apache Software
Foundation: .

For new committers:

First, please read through the "Guide for New Committers":
http://www.apache.org/dev/new-committers-guide.html There is some
useful information there related to email, security, etc.

Next, please add an entry for yourself on this project page:
http://incubator.apache.org/openofficeorg/people.html

Now that you are a committer, this is a good opportunity for you to
make your first commit, editing that page. The simplest way is to use
the Apache CMS to edit this page via the web:

http://incubator.apache.org/openofficeorg/website-local.html#using-the-apache-cms-bookmarklet-simpler-method

- the Apache OpenOffice PPMC

New committer: Li Feng Wang

The Apache OpenOffice PPMC announces the addition of committer
Li Feng Wang, wanglf@ apache.org

The list of all current podling committers is at:
.

Committers have a defined role in the workings of the Apache Software
Foundation: .

For new committers:

First, please read through the "Guide for New Committers":
http://www.apache.org/dev/new-committers-guide.html There is some
useful information there related to email, security, etc.

Next, please add an entry for yourself on this project page:
http://incubator.apache.org/openofficeorg/people.html

Now that you are a committer, this is a good opportunity for you to
make your first commit, editing that page. The simplest way is to use
the Apache CMS to edit this page via the web:

http://incubator.apache.org/openofficeorg/website-local.html#using-the-apache-cms-bookmarklet-simpler-method

- the Apache OpenOffice PPMC

New committer: Dong Jun Zong

The Apache OpenOffice PPMC announces the addition of committer
Dong Jun Zong, zongdj@ apache.org

The list of all current podling committers is at:
.

Committers have a defined role in the workings of the Apache Software
Foundation: .

For new committers:

First, please read through the "Guide for New Committers":
http://www.apache.org/dev/new-committers-guide.html There is some
useful information there related to email, security, etc.

Next, please add an entry for yourself on this project page:
http://incubator.apache.org/openofficeorg/people.html

Now that you are a committer, this is a good opportunity for you to
make your first commit, editing that page. The simplest way is to use
the Apache CMS to edit this page via the web:

http://incubator.apache.org/openofficeorg/website-local.html#using-the-apache-cms-bookmarklet-simpler-method

- the Apache OpenOffice PPMC

New committer: Bingbing Ma

The Apache OpenOffice PPMC announces the addition of committer
Bingbing Ma, slandy@ apache.org

The list of all current podling committers is at:
.

Committers have a defined role in the workings of the Apache Software
Foundation: .

For new committers:

First, please read through the "Guide for New Committers":
http://www.apache.org/dev/new-committers-guide.html There is some
useful information there related to email, security, etc.

Next, please add an entry for yourself on this project page:
http://incubator.apache.org/openofficeorg/people.html

Now that you are a committer, this is a good opportunity for you to
make your first commit, editing that page. The simplest way is to use
the Apache CMS to edit this page via the web:

http://incubator.apache.org/openofficeorg/website-local.html#using-the-apache-cms-bookmarklet-simpler-method

- the Apache OpenOffice PPMC

RE: Updating Committers on Project Status Page (was RE: New committer: Chen ZuoJun)

I have some new committer announcements to post to be complete on recent 
additions.

I am going to take a few days and see if I can generate a complete update of 
the committer list on the Podling Status page.  This is a bit easier than 
manually checking for any omissions and manually introducing new ones in the 
correct place, at least this one time.

So it will be out of sync for a time, but it should be fine before the end of 
the week.

 - Dennis

-Original Message-
From: Rob Weir [mailto:rabas...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Sunday, September 23, 2012 19:51
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: Updating Committers on Project Status Page (was RE: New committer: 
Chen ZuoJun)

On Sep 23, 2012, at 10:15 PM, "Dennis E. Hamilton"  wrote:

> Rob,
>
> I recently took a look at 
> <http://incubator.apache.org/projects/openofficeorg.html> to see if I could 
> derive that list from the Roster.
>
> What gave me pause is that the list is apparently maintained in XML.  I could 
> not find anywhere that MarkDown is used.  Is that correct?
>

Correct.  It is XML. It used to require that I check out the whole
directory, update the XML, run an ant script to generate the HTML and
then check in both the XML and HTML.  This is much simplified by the
CMS which does the template generation behind the scenes.

> I could still mechanically derive the XML elements that are used now, 
> although it is a bit more complicated than search and replace on a CSV of an 
> extract of the roster.  If I were to do that, I would also indicate who is on 
> the PPMC.
>
> Any suggestions?

I'm not sure we need to maintain that "status file" once we graduate.
I think it is more of a podling tracking thing. So it might be
simplest if we just manually update it for now.  But longer term it
would be good to be able to generate a page for the project website
from the Roster.   The ODF Toolkit has an XSLTRunner component that
could be used for this.

-Rob

[ ... ]

2012-10-01 Status: PPMC and Committer Roster

2012-10-01 Thread Dennis E. Hamilton

As of the end of day 2012-10-01, the Apache OpenOffice podling
has 118 committers with 73 on the PPMC.

Since the previous, 2012-09-02 report, there is an increase of
8 committers and 1 PPMC member (a returnee).

CURRENT PPMC AND COMMITTER STATUS

   1 champion
   5 mentor
   1 mentor/committer
  73 PPMC (all currently committers)
  44 committer
   6 other
 130 tOTAL = pending PPMC? + complete + authz PENDINGs

PENDING ACTIONS

   0 invite (to be made)
   0 accepted? (awaited from invitee)
   0 iCLA? (awaited from invitee)
   0 ID chosen? (awaited from invitee)
   0 ID pending (being issued by Apache)
   0 authz (permissions to OOO SVN to be set)
  18 PPMC? (eligible but not participating on PPMC)
 112 complete 
  33 other
 263 TOTAL

 - Dennis, for the Apache OpenOffice PPMC


-Original Message-
From: Dennis E. Hamilton [mailto:orc...@apache.org] 
Sent: Sunday, September 02, 2012 18:06
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: 2012-09-02 Status: PPMC and Committer Roster

As of the end of day 2012-09-01, the Apache OpenOffice podling
has 110 committers, with 72 on the PPMC.

Since the previous, 2012-08-02 report, there is an increase of 
1 committer and 1 PPMC member.

CURRENT PPMC AND COMMITTER STATUS

   1 champion
   5 mentor
   1 mentor/committer
  72 PPMC (all currently committers)
  37 committer (including 18 eligible PPMC)
   6 other
 122 total = pending PPMC? + complete + authz statuses

PENDING ACTIONS

   0 invite
   0 accepted?
   0 iCLA?
   0 ID chosen?
   1 ID pending (to be committer when completed)
   1 authz
  18 PPMC?
 103 complete
  34 other
 157 total

-Original Message-
From: Dennis E. Hamilton [mailto:orc...@apache.org] 
Sent: Friday, August 03, 2012 14:28
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: 2012-08-02 Status: PPMC and Committer Roster

As of the end of day, 2012-08-02, the Apache OpenOffice podling
has 109 committers, with 72 on the PPMC.

Since the previous, 2012-07-01 report, there is an increase of
8 committers, with no change on the PPMC.

CURRENT PPMC AND COMMITTER STATUS

   1 champion
   5 mentor
   1 mentor/committer
  72 PPMC (all currently committers)
  36 committer (including 18 eligible PPMC)
   7 other
 122 total = pending PPMC? + complete + authz statuses

PENDING ACTIONS

   0 invite
   0 accepted?
   0 iCLA?
   0 ID chosen?
   0 ID pending
   5 authz
  18 PPMC?
  99 complete
  34 other
 156 total



 [ ... ]


smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature

RE: [VOTE] [PMC] Starting Membership for Apache OpenOffice PMC

2012-10-01 Thread Dennis E. Hamilton

 [ X ] +1 approve
 [  ]  0 abstain
 [  ] -1 disapprove, for the following reasons:

-Original Message-
From: Andrew Rist [mailto:andrew.r...@oracle.com] 
Sent: Monday, October 01, 2012 15:38
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: [VOTE] [PMC] Starting Membership for Apache OpenOffice PMC

This is a call for vote on selecting the following list as the starting 
membership for the Apache OpenOffice PMC, to be listed in the TLP 
resolution.  The voting is for the entire slate as listed.

Apache OpenOffice PMC Starting Membership:
Andre Fischer (af)
Andrea Pescetti (pescetti)
Andrew Rist (arist)
Ariel Constenla-Haile (arielch)
Armin Le Grand (alg)
Dave Fisher (wave)
Donald Harbison (dpharbison)
Drew Jensen (atjensen)
Ian Lynch (ingotian)
Jürgen Schmidt (jsc)
Kay Schenk (kschenk)
Kazunari Hirano (khirano)
Louis Suarez-Potts (louis)
Marcus Lange (marcus)
Oliver-Rainer Wittmann (orw)
Pedro Giffuni (pfg)
Peter Junge (pj)
Raphael Bircher (rbircher)
Regina Henschel (regina)
RGB.ES (rgb-es)
Roberto Galoppini (galoppini)
Yang Shih-Ching (imacat)
Yong Lin Ma (mayongl)


The balloting will be until UTC midnight Thursday,
4 October: 2012-10-04T24:00Z.

[ ... ]

Taking our own pulse: ZDNet on OpenOffice

2012-09-29 Thread Dennis E. Hamilton

This article provides a forward-looking account of opportunities for Apache 
OpenOffice work:



There is mention of an openoffice.org blog (without any link).  I am not 
certain what is being referred to.   

 - Dennis

RE: Call for comments: Webpage for Listing OpenOffice Consultants

2012-09-26 Thread Dennis E. Hamilton

OK, you got me ...

Umm, if the third party puts up an AOO-supplied logo, I don't think one can 
learn anything at AOO other than whether or not there are page views that pull 
the resource from the AOO location.  It gets a little messy to track those.

If there is a third-party page or image (or other resource) that AOO holds a 
link to, the operation of that link can be checked from the AOO side by 
performing a get of that resource from a script.  This pull-based scheme seems 
cleaner.  That looks like an easy way to check that the third-party site is 
operating and an agreed resource is still reachable.

 - Dennis 

PS: This can still be gamed.  If there is any doubt, someone might need to fire 
up their browser in a sandbox and go look.

-Original Message-
From: Rob Weir [mailto:robw...@apache.org] 
Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2012 14:25
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: Call for comments: Webpage for Listing OpenOffice Consultants

[ ... ]

Dennis will like this.  Just thought of a "poka-yoke" approach to
identifying obsolete listings.  Simply require that the logo be hosted
by the listed company.  That way, if the company moves on, there is a
good chance that the image link will break as well and this will be
obvious when looking at the listings.

[ ... ]

[DISCUSS][PMC] Proposed Initial PMC List and process

2012-09-25 Thread Dennis E. Hamilton

My recommendation:

48-hour steps are too short.  Take at least 72 minimums, state fixed UTC 
earliest-end date-times (so no one has to figure out when "from now" is), and 
maybe skip over weekend days.

There's no rush.

 - Dennis

-Original Message-
From: Andrew Rist [mailto:andrew.r...@oracle.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2012 11:36
To: ooo-dev
Subject: [PMC] Proposed Initial PMC List and process

[ ... ]

Proposed Process:

  * 48 hour window to build consensus on this process moving forward
(Tues-Wed)
  * 48 hour (+48 hour weekend) discussion period (Thurs-Fri + Sat Sun) -
stabilization of the finalized Initial PMC List
  * 72 hour vote on the resulting list as the initial PMC list (ending
next Wed.)

[ ... ]

RE: LICENSE text in the user interface

2012-09-24 Thread Dennis E. Hamilton

Right you are.

I have no further concerns.  

 - Dennis

-Original Message-
From: Rob Weir [mailto:robw...@apache.org] 
Sent: Monday, September 24, 2012 12:59
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: LICENSE text in the user interface

On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 2:45 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton  wrote:
> Oh.
>
> I thought it was *not* the practice of ASF to claim copyright over code.  It 
> is always weird to say all rights reserved and simultaneously offer a license.
>

It is Apache practice to claim copyright on the selection/arrangement
of the source files that comprise the distribution.  This is different
from the copyright on the individual source files in the same way as
the copyright on an anthology of poetry differs from the copyright on
each of the individual poems.

And there is nothing odd/wrong about reserving all rights and offering
a license at the same time.  In fact that is the normal combination.
Any rights not covered by the license are reserved to the copyright
holder(s).

> Is it necessary to include a copyright notice in the About box at all?  ASF 
> has no copyright on any of the source code.  Where is the original tangible 
> expression that has there be such a copyright here?
>

False premise.   Remember, the first line of our NOTICE file is
required to be the Apache copyright:
http://apache.org/legal/src-headers.html#notice   Putting it in the
about box is not making any new claims.  It is just making the claims
more evident.

In any case, if there are remaining doubts about this, II recommend
taking them to legal-discuss for a definitive response.

Regards,

-Rob

[ ... ]

RE: LICENSE text in the user interface

2012-09-24 Thread Dennis E. Hamilton

Oh.

I thought it was *not* the practice of ASF to claim copyright over code.  It is 
always weird to say all rights reserved and simultaneously offer a license.  

Is it necessary to include a copyright notice in the About box at all?  ASF has 
no copyright on any of the source code.  Where is the original tangible 
expression that has there be such a copyright here?

 - Dennis



-Original Message-
From: Rob Weir [mailto:robw...@apache.org] 
Sent: Monday, September 24, 2012 11:18
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: LICENSE text in the user interface

[ ... ]

The about box already has this statement:

"Copyright © 2012 Apache Software Foundation. All rights reserved."

It would probably be fine to say, "Applicable licenses and notices for
included 3rd party components can be found..." and then either have
the path, URL or a button to bring up the details.

[ ... ]

RE: Updating Committers on Project Status Page (was RE: New committer: Chen ZuoJun)

I don't believe that the lists on this page are created automatically.  Rob had 
been maintaining them:
<http://incubator.apache.org/projects/openofficeorg.html>

If that page is authored in XML, I can cope.  I just want to be certain that is 
the form which is the authoring source.  That is all the CMS shows me when I 
log on at that page.  It is also all I see in the Infrastructure SVN for the 
page.

 - Dennis

-Original Message-
From: Dave Fisher [mailto:dave2w...@comcast.net] 
Sent: Sunday, September 23, 2012 19:32
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: Updating Committers on Project Status Page (was RE: New committer: 
Chen ZuoJun)

On Sep 23, 2012, at 7:14 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:

> Rob,
> 
> I recently took a look at 
> <http://incubator.apache.org/projects/openofficeorg.html> to see if I could 
> derive that list from the Roster.
> 
> What gave me pause is that the list is apparently maintained in XML.  I could 
> not find anywhere that MarkDown is used.  Is that correct?  

Yes, I believe that infra creates rosters in various ways from the authz lists.

[ ... ]

Updating Committers on Project Status Page (was RE: New committer: Chen ZuoJun)

Rob,

I recently took a look at 
<http://incubator.apache.org/projects/openofficeorg.html> to see if I could 
derive that list from the Roster.

What gave me pause is that the list is apparently maintained in XML.  I could 
not find anywhere that MarkDown is used.  Is that correct?  

I could still mechanically derive the XML elements that are used now, although 
it is a bit more complicated than search and replace on a CSV of an extract of 
the roster.  If I were to do that, I would also indicate who is on the PPMC.

Any suggestions?

 - Dennis

-Original Message-
From: Rob Weir [mailto:robw...@apache.org] 
Sent: Sunday, September 23, 2012 17:41
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: New committer: Chen ZuoJun

On Sun, Sep 23, 2012 at 1:13 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton  wrote:
> The Apache OpenOffice PPMC announces the addition of committer
> Chen ZuoJun, zjchen@ apache.org
>
> The list of all current podling committers is at:
> <http://people.apache.org/committers-by-project.html#ooo>.
>

And one other place:  http://incubator.apache.org/projects/openofficeorg.html

That page is part of the IPMC's tracking of podling status and feeds
into their "Status of the Clutch" report:
http://incubator.apache.org/clutch.html

Some may recall that we had a reporter use the "status of the clutch"
report to claim that the project was not growing.  That was when we
were not updating the report.  Since that is the official IPMC view of
the podlings, it is important that we keep this information
up-to-date, until the project graduates.

I was updating this status page whenever a new committer was voted in.
 It would be great if someone else could take this over now.

When a new committer is added, the status file needs to be updated in
two places.

1) Added as a News item.  Automation depends on the wording, so don't
be clever.  Just follow the examples there.

2) Added in the list of committers.

This can most easily be edited via the Apache CMS.

[ ... ]

RE: [User Docs] What do we as a community want for user documentation or AOO

Hey, let's get review of that document.  I didn't realized it had been updated 
beyond being a placeholder for the needed document.

Where is it found on the ODFAUthors repository?

 - Dennis

-Original Message-
From: Keith N. McKenna [mailto:keith.mcke...@comcast.net] 
Sent: Sunday, September 23, 2012 12:39
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [User Docs] What do we as a community want for user documentation 
or AOO

[ ... ]

... there is 
a complete Getting Started Guide or AOO v3.4. The chapters are complete 
and waiting for review.

[ ... ]

RE: Open Office Web Developer Tool

There is a limited web development tool built into OpenOffice.

It is called Writer/Web.

You can see it in action by

 1. Opening an HTML file in Writer, or
 2. On the Apache OpenOffice Start Page, 
Choose Templates | New Document | HTML Document,
or
 3. Start a Writer document and save it as an 
HTML Document (which will switch to Writer/Web)

You can also save an HTML document as an HTML Template (.oht) file.  This can 
be used as a starter template for creating HTML pages.

You can get a Web Browser preview when in Writer/Web.

What is not provided is an easy way to coordinate authoring with a web server 
-- you can access shared folders on web servers, but there is no integration of 
the kind provided by FrontPage and other products.  There is no integration 
with FrontPage Extensions, WebDAV for site authoring, or with a version control 
system that is tied into a web site's page management.

I imagine there are plug-ins that could help with this, but I don't know that 
any are particularly well-developed.

 - Dennis

PS: I still use FrontPage 2003, which is pretty stable although no longer under 
development.  Microsoft's free Visual Web Developer Express versions will also 
coordinate with web servers.  Interoperability with Front Page extensions does 
not coordinate with the Front Page Extensions check-out and check-in for 
coordinated source-control though.  If FTP deployment works for you, that might 
work well enough.

-Original Message-
From: Raphael Bircher [mailto:r.birc...@gmx.ch] 
Sent: Sunday, September 23, 2012 12:07
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: Open Office Web Developer Tool

Hi

This is not a general answare, it's my personal option only. First of
all, I'm happy, that you like Apache OpenOffice. Thanks for using it,
and thanks for your feedback.

Now about the Web Development Tool. For my point of view a clear no.
First, it's not realy the task of a Office Suite to create webpages. 2.
There are other tools who are only focused on this. For Exemple
BlueGriffon (Open Source) or Dreamweaver (Proprietary). 3. Only a verry
small Userbase from the over all user base will use it. You need to
know, this is not a easy feature. A compleet WYSIWYG Web Editor is a
very complex programm, and compleet defferent from a Office Suite. This
means, that we have to add a load of new code wich makes our software
fat. This can not be our goal.

To make a good program, you have to concentrate on one area. With a
Office Suite we have allready a bit area. So I see no reason, why we
should extend it. As said, this is my personal Option. Other people
probabily have different points of views.

Greetings Raphael


Am 23.09.12 18:34, schrieb D Wiemers:
> Hello,
>
>  My name is Daniel Wiemers. I have been using Open office for the last 6 
> months, and I love it! I wanted to tell you how much I like it, and thank you 
> for the time and effort you have devoted in developing it.
>
>  Have you ever thought to make a web development tool like Microsoft 
> Front Page? I think it would be a wonderful addition to Open Office, and many 
> people would find it very useful as Front Page seems to have been left 
> unfinished, convoluted, confusing, and frustrating. I think a lot of people 
> would like to make basic web pages, maybe with some buttons, a background, 
> videos, java, stuff like that, and I have found that finding good web 
> development tools, even if you are willing to pay a lot of money for them, is 
> not easy. I really like Open Office, and I find it easy to use and easy to 
> learn. I think Open Office would be a great company to make a shareware web 
> development tool, that is easy to use and easy to learn.
>
> Thank you,
>
>
> -Daniel
> 


-- 
My private Homepage: http://www.raphaelbircher.ch/

RE: [User Docs] What do we as a community want for user documentation or AOO

+1 on JFDI (though declare yourself to wrap-up the [User Docs] thread.

+1 on Project Blog post

and have fun 

 - Dennis

-Original Message-
From: Keith N. McKenna [mailto:keith.mcke...@comcast.net] 
Sent: Sunday, September 23, 2012 12:21
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [User Docs] What do we as a community want for user documentation 
or AOO

[ ... ]

As a process engineer I appreciate that; all overhead does is add to the 
cost with often minimal benefit. After a fairly decent night sleep and 
some further reflection I had though that it might be better to cancel 
the request for lazy consensus and just forge ahead.

[ ... ]

I agree that the nitty gritty of getting it done will be the more 
difficult part. I have some ideas that still need some fleshing out. A 
project blog post sounds like an interesting recruiting idea.

[ ... ]

New committer: Chen ZuoJun

The Apache OpenOffice PPMC announces the addition of committer
Chen ZuoJun, zjchen@ apache.org

The list of all current podling committers is at:
.

Committers have a defined role in the workings of the Apache Software
Foundation: .

For new committers:

First, please read through the "Guide for New Committers":
http://www.apache.org/dev/new-committers-guide.html There is some
useful information there related to email, security, etc.

Next, please add an entry for yourself on this project page:
http://incubator.apache.org/openofficeorg/people.html

Now that you are a committer, this is a good opportunity for you to
make your first commit, editing that page. The simplest way is to use
the Apache CMS to edit this page via the web:

http://incubator.apache.org/openofficeorg/website-local.html#using-the-apache-cms-bookmarklet-simpler-method

- the Apache OpenOffice PPMC

New committer: Linyi Li

The Apache OpenOffice PPMC announces the addition of committer
Linyi Li, liliny@ apache.org

The list of all current podling committers is at:
.

Committers have a defined role in the workings of the Apache Software
Foundation: .

For new committers:

First, please read through the "Guide for New Committers":
http://www.apache.org/dev/new-committers-guide.html There is some
useful information there related to email, security, etc.

Next, please add an entry for yourself on this project page:
http://incubator.apache.org/openofficeorg/people.html

Now that you are a committer, this is a good opportunity for you to
make your first commit, editing that page. The simplest way is to use
the Apache CMS to edit this page via the web:

http://incubator.apache.org/openofficeorg/website-local.html#using-the-apache-cms-bookmarklet-simpler-method

- the Apache OpenOffice PPMC

RE: [User Docs] What do we as a community want for user documentation or AOO

2012-09-22 Thread Dennis E. Hamilton

Rob,

I agree, there is no reason to turn away new contributions brought to the 
project by their contributors.

I agree, the lazy consensus on this one is odd.

 - Dennis

-Original Message-
From: Rob Weir [mailto:robw...@apache.org] 
Sent: Saturday, September 22, 2012 14:18
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [User Docs] What do we as a community want for user documentation 
or AOO

[ ... ]

In other words, that a non-existent effort in the project not be
started to compete with the non-existent effort at ODFAuthors?  IMHO
this not the ideal use of lazy consensus.  You should seek lazy
consensus for what you want to do, not what you want someone else not
to do.   In the end, if someone came to the project with documentation
to contribute, I think we would be happy accept it under ALv2 and not
turn them away and tell them to go elsewhere.  Or are you suggesting
that we would reject such contributions?

> In other words, there won't be any forking of ODFAuthors work into the 
> project.  I assume that means avoidance of duplicate effort as well.
>
> I'm aligned with that direction.
>
>  - Dennis
[ ... ]

RE: [User Docs] What do we as a community want for user documentation or AOO

2012-09-22 Thread Dennis E. Hamilton

I am not clear what the lazy consensus is about.

Clearly, there is no restriction on anyone contributing to User Guides for 
Apache OpenOffice on ODFAUthors, beyond the terms/conventions/what-ever that 
apply to contributions there.

So I suppose what is being asked for is consensus that there will not, at this 
time, be any separate effort inside of the Apache OpenOffice project and the 
project will look to relying on the ODFAuthors site for emergence of updated 
User Guides.  Contributions should be made there.

In other words, there won't be any forking of ODFAuthors work into the project. 
 I assume that means avoidance of duplicate effort as well.

I'm aligned with that direction.

 - Dennis

-Original Message-
From: Keith N. McKenna [mailto:keith.mcke...@comcast.net] 
Sent: Saturday, September 22, 2012 07:47
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [User Docs] What do we as a community want for user documentation 
or AOO

Keith N. McKenna wrote:
> Greetings All;
>
> In order to stimulate some discussion on user documentation I have added
> the hollowing page to the User Documentation Plan on the Plannig Wiki:
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/User+Guides+Revisted.
> It offers 3 scenarios or the creation of the docs. I believe that we can
> no longer put this issue aside.
>
> Please take a look at the page and feel free to comment there and on this
> list. Also feel free to add to or change any content there.
>
> Regards
> Keith N. McKenna
>
>
Based on the discussion in this thread and on the wiki page it appears 
for the short term that Scenario 2 is the best way to go. At this point 
I would like to ask for lazy consensus to use ODFAuthors site and the 
3.4 documents already there to create and publish updated documentation.
I will leave this open until 2012-09-26 at 05:45 UTC.

Regards
Keith N. McKenna

RE: [DISCUSS][PMC] Proposed PMC List

2012-09-20 Thread Dennis E. Hamilton

Just for clarification, please.

When you say voting is secret for ASF members and Board members, that there is 
a way to ensure only eligible voters cast at most one ballot, but the voters 
are not identified?  That is, it is not known who voted and what their vote was?

That is generally what is meant by a secret ballot.  A private ballot is one 
where the participants know what votes were cast (as in the case of a committer 
vote on a private list) but the individual votes are not available generally, 
although the vote can be audited by authorities having oversight (as in the 
committer vote case).

 - Dennis

-Original Message-
From: sebb [mailto:seb...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2012 02:49
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS][PMC] Proposed PMC List

[ ... ]

ASF members are nominated on the members list (and in members-only files).
ASF member voting is secret.

Board members are nominated on the members list.
Voting is secret.

[ ... ]

RE: [DISCUSS][PMC] Proposed PMC List

2012-09-20 Thread Dennis E. Hamilton

Dave, I'm puzzled.  

I thought this thread and the one on which nominations are being made was at 
the initiative of Andrew Rist.

Are you and he collaborating on compilation of the results?

It would be great if there was a single compilation of the results, it could be 
verified by anyone, and there can be subsequent discussion on what to make of 
it, if anything.

 - Dennis

-Original Message-
From: Dave Fisher [mailto:dave2w...@comcast.net] 
Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2012 06:06
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS][PMC] Proposed PMC List

On Sep 20, 2012, at 6:06 AM, Ross Gardler  wrote:

> On 20 September 2012 11:49, sebb  wrote:
>> 
>> Once a PMC exists, new members must be nominated and discussed on the
>> private@tlp list.
>> Votes are held on the private list, so is not secret, but it is not
>> public either.
> 
> There are very few *must* items in the ASF. In fact it is up to the
> PMC to decide how and where the decision is made. When voting on
> people most, but not all, projects do it in private.

Apache POI is an example. The PMC considers the public vote to be an incentive 
for contributors. Since votes happen very infrequently it does not add a lot of 
traffic to the lists.

I think that process here is proceeding well. I hope to put together a list on 
Sunday when I return home.

If a wiki is created before then perhaps it should list only names without a 
count. That way we can all see if anyone is missing.

Regards,
Dave

> 
> Ross

RE: [DISCUSS][PMC] Proposed PMC List

2012-09-19 Thread Dennis E. Hamilton

+1

There is absolutely nothing wrong with a list process for individuals 
nominating 10 persons for the PPMC.  Furthermore, let's have just one procedure 
in place at a time.  When this one is concluded, there will be occasion to 
reflect and determine the next steps.

The tabulation will be very interesting, since we'll know the frequency with 
which various individuals are nominated by others.  That's an useful straw 
poll.  What is made of it is something that will happen in full view and 
without haste.

Furthermore, there is no need to discuss or justify the nominations being made. 
 (There is not much value in nominating individuals who have declined to be on 
the PMC, but there's no harm either.)

I recommend that the process continue.  My only objection is that having secret 
nominations is not compatible with the Apache Way and the oversight 
responsibilities of the ASF.  There are private ballots, but not secret ones as 
far as I know.  

I recommend that no one accept nominations privately and that those who have 
already sent theirs via any back-channel use ooo-private if they do not want 
their selection of names made public.  (Since there are no -1 votes, and 
everybody is constrained to 10, I have trouble seeing the problem.)  There is 
no reason to identify those who have nominated anyone on the consolidated 
report.

 - Dennis

-Original Message-
From: Kay Schenk [mailto:kay.sch...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2012 12:26
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS][PMC] Proposed PMC List

On 09/19/2012 10:38 AM, Louis Suárez-Potts wrote:
[ ... ]
> In this way, a wiki can provide more than a mail list post.
>
> Louis
>

Yes, a wiki can provide more than a mail post, but I think this exercise 
is valid, and provides a convenient way for *anyone* on this list to 
express an "opinion" without explicitly stating why. I actually think 
this is a point in the mailing lists favor. This approach is simple and 
based on impressions of individuals involved with this project. I don't 
see much wrong with that. Picking "10" has been difficult for all of us, 
but I did understand that "10" was not a magic number for the final PMC.

I agree with Juergen that we should complete this circle. I've found it 
pretty interesting so far.

-- 

MzK

"We never sit anything out. We are cups, constantly and quietly
  being filled.  The trick is, knowing how to tip ourselves over and
  let the beautiful stuff out."
  -- Ray Bradbury, "Zen in the Art of Writing"

RE: [DISCUSS][PMC] Proposed PMC List

2012-09-19 Thread Dennis E. Hamilton

Did you mean to do this on the [PMC] Proposed PMC List thread, not the 
[DISCUSS] thread?

-Original Message-
From: Ian Lynch [mailto:ianrly...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2012 09:22
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS][PMC] Proposed PMC List

Ok, Andrew persuaded me ;-)

Andre Fischer (af)
Andrea Pescetti (pescetti)
Andrew Rist (arist)
Armin Le Grand (alg)
Donald P. Harbison (dpharbison)
Jürgen Schmidt (jsc)
Kazunari Hirano (khirano)
Louis Suarez-potts (louis)
Marcus Lange (marcus)
Peter Junge (pj)

But I can think of several others that really could/should be
included. I was trying to get some sort of balance, nationally and by
expertise but might well have failed miserably ;-) Some of it is
simply down to knowing some people better than others.

-- 
Ian

Ofqual Accredited IT Qualifications (The Schools ITQ)

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

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

RE: [DISCUSS] [PMC] Proposed PMC List

2012-09-19 Thread Dennis E. Hamilton

-1 

This procedure lacks transparency and accountability.  It is incompatible with 
how project governance is accomplished.

My recommendation is that those who have some reason to require anonymity with 
regard to their nominations (that is what it is, individuals are asked to make 
10 nominations) should send their nominations to ooo-private@ 
incubator.apache.org.

The subject should contain "[PMC] Proposed PMC List" and it should not contain 
any discussion.  These are simply nominations.  The moderators of ooo-private 
will accept those posts from all sources.

When the compilation of nominations is prepared, *all* submitters of 
nominations will be identified in a list as confirmation that their nominations 
were included.  There should be no identification of who has nominated a 
particular individual.  Only the number of nominations for any nominated 
individual should be reported.

It would be useful to have the report double-checked by one or more PPMC 
members to ensure that noone's nominations were overlooked or double counted.  
(On duplicate nominations, the usual rule is to use the latest one received.)

 - Dennis

-Original Message-
From: Andrew Rist [mailto:andrew.r...@oracle.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2012 16:00
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] [PMC] Proposed PMC List

(top posting after private messages - I cannot describe the shame I 
feel...  ;-)

I have an option that I believe will handle Andrea's concerns.  I have 
spoken with Ross and he is amenable to receiving Proposed PMC entries 
off list.
If anyone is concerned about sending their list to ooo-dev, you can send 
it to Ross ( rgardler at apache) instead, and at the end of the period 
(next Sunday), he will send an anonymized summary of the votes he has 
received, along with a breakdown of submissions by committers/PPMC vs 
other community members.

We have received lists from 10 people and have 25 nominees with multiple 
votes.  It would be great to get even more feedback.

A.

On 9/18/2012 1:17 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
> On 17/09/2012 Andrew Rist wrote:
>> * This is not a vote. This is a search for consensus. Please no '-1'
>> replies. Let's see what this process produces, and then discuss
>> from there.
>
> It seems that the process is working quite well, and that we are on 
> the right way to bootstrap a PMC by consensus.
>
> I surely don't want to block the current process, but I wonder if 
> allowing people to "vote" (actually, express preferences) anonymously 
> would be better for some volunteers/cultures. Our mentors have often 
> stated that we have secure voting solutions available, but maybe this 
> is overkill and time-consuming, and it would be enough to allow people 
> to send their lists to a mentor (if available), who would repost them 
> here.
>
> It is not an issue that I feel personally: it's OK for me to continue 
> with public messages on ooo-dev. But it could be that others have 
> problems, and in that case I'd encourage them to speak up so that we 
> can find a way to ensure that everyone can express their opinions.
>
> Regards,
>   Andrea.

RE: Amazon Download of Apache OpenOffice 3.4

2012-09-17 Thread Dennis E. Hamilton

Double Checking to ensure that the mistake is not mine:

 1. The Win32 downloader file itself is named 
Apache_OpenOffice_3_4_Downloader.exe 
It is signed with an Amazon Services LLC
signature (CA is VeriSign Class 3 Code Signing)
timestamped 2012-07-24

 2. When the downloader is running, the window it
puts up has 
"Apache OpenOffice 34 - Amazon Software Downloader"
in the title and it says it is downloading
"Apache OpenOffice 34 by Apache" in the progress
dialog.

 3. MY MISTAKE.  I checked the screen capture taken when
I did the original download.  It is always Apache
OpenOffice, never Amazon OpenOffice.

I apologize for provoking alarms.

 - Dennis

-Original Message-
From: Dave Fisher [mailto:dave2w...@comcast.net] 
Sent: Monday, September 17, 2012 09:02
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Cc: Apache Brand Management
Subject: Re: Amazon Download of Apache OpenOffice 3.4

On Sep 15, 2012, at 12:45 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:

> 
> 8. Going through the one-click purchase of the $0.00 software, I was not sent 
> the executable.  Instead, I was sent an "Amazon OpenOffice 34 by Apache" 
> downloader executable.  I ran it.  It is a simple dialog with a progress bar, 
> the gull button, and a message that the item can be downloaded again from my 
> software library. It downloads the software.  It doesn't say where.

This name is a branding issue that must be fixed immediately.

This should probably be handled by Shane as VP of branding.

Regards,
Dave

[ ... ]

RE: Amazon Download of Apache OpenOffice 3.4

2012-09-17 Thread Dennis E. Hamilton

Interesting idea about signing of the downloaders.

Both Amazon downloaders are signed, but that does not stop the 
infrequently-downloaded warning from Internet Explorer.  (The OpenOffice 
downloader did not trigger that warning, but the generic downloader that works 
with the Amazon Games and Software Library did!)

Of course, running the downloaded OpenOffice.exe is going to raise all of the 
usual non-browser warnings.

-Original Message-
From: Rob Weir [mailto:robw...@apache.org] 
Sent: Sunday, September 16, 2012 23:50
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: Amazon Download of Apache OpenOffice 3.4

On Sat, Sep 15, 2012 at 3:45 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton
 wrote:
[ ... ]
>  6. Amazon has a Games and Software Library for users.  This can be used to 
> re-download the software and also get product keys (not applicable for this 
> one).   Out of curiosity, I followed that link and found that they are still 
> holding tax-return software for the US 2008 tax year that I purchased and 
> downloaded in 2009.  Now the Apache OpenOffice 3.4 is there now too.
>
>  7. Amazon has their own downloader.  It is needed to retrieve software from 
> the Games and Software Library.  I didn't install that, although it is needed 
> to download from the library.
>
>  8. Going through the one-click purchase of the $0.00 software, I was not 
> sent the executable.  Instead, I was sent an "Amazon OpenOffice 34 by Apache" 
> downloader executable.  I ran it.  It is a simple dialog with a progress bar, 
> the gull button, and a message that the item can be downloaded again from my 
> software library. It downloads the software.  It doesn't say where.
[ ... ]

My guess is they required a signed exe for the initial download.
Since Apache does not provide one, Amazon's workaround was via this
downloader app.  I'd bet that this hack was to get around browser
warnings about unsigned code.

[ ... ]

RE: [User Docs] What do we as a community want for user documentation or AOO

It is my understanding that the openoffice.org web site content is not a 
subject of the Oracle grant.  Although the ASF now has custody of the domains, 
there is no content grant.

The explicit licenses on content there continue to apply.

My personal preference would be to continue on ODF Authors so long as what is 
developed is a derivative of work already there.

Whether republishing directly on openoffice.org becomes appropriate or not can 
be resolved when the time comes.  Also, if ODFAuthors were not to be 
perpetuated, it might be necessary to host it elsewhere, still not necessarily 
on ASF servers.

 - Dennis

-Original Message-
From: Keith N. McKenna [mailto:keith.mcke...@comcast.net] 
Sent: Sunday, September 16, 2012 19:03
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [User Docs] What do we as a community want for user documentation 
or AOO

[ ... ]

> Scenario 2 under "Cons":
> "Licensing issues". We are already hosting the existing "outdated"
> guides on Apache servers (eg.
> http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation).

My gut says that they were "grandfathered" in with the original grant to 
Apache and that attempts to go forward with new docs would meet with 
serious push back from many quarters.

[ ... ]

[OFF-LIST] RE: What is a good Project Management Committee?

Thanks for that.  And good point.

 - Dennis

FYI, there is no knowledge on the PPMC how a list of (some) OpenOffice users 
was obtained or how many OpenOffice users were e-mailed.

On the other hand, there were two initial committers associated with an 
organization and site that was making misleading claims and using the 
OpenOffice.org trademark in a confusing manner.

Those two initial committers were encouraged to subscribe to ooo-private and to 
be on the PPMC to resolve that.  They did appear, though communication was not 
clear-cut.  There was also a reaction from the trademark@ a.o group directly to 
the organization.

I don't know that there has been a successful resolution.

Now that Apache OpenOffice is producing releases, it is probably irrelevant 
other than with respect to trademark issues.  The organization seems to have 
made no progress although the site continues to request donations.  

The two individuals are still on the PPMC.  That has not interfered with PPMC 
activities in any way.  

-Original Message-
From: Andrea Pescetti [mailto:pesce...@apache.org] 
Sent: Sunday, September 16, 2012 13:55
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: What is a good Project Management Committee?

Rob Weir wrote:
> For example, we had some initial committers who sent out bulk emails
> to a list of OpenOffice users. ... They issued
> press releases claiming that OpenOffice would fail, that the only way
> to get it to succeed was to send them money.  They did this using a
> name and website and claims that were abusive to the OpenOffice
> trademarks that were transferred to Apache.

While this is not what I had in mind when I raised the 
"trust"/"commitment" concern, it is a valid point.

These cases can probably be discussed on an individual basis and only 
after the individuals have confirmed they want to serve in the PMC, to 
avoid useless discussions.

Regards,
   Andrea.

RE: [User Docs] What do we as a community want for user documentation or AOO

If, as Keith proposes, the work is conducted at the ODFAUthors site and the 
ODFAuthors licensing is retained, the question then becomes simply whether 
redistribution on a site in ASF custody is appropriate.

That seems simplest and appropriate.  Even if there is a concern about the 
dual-license affixed to the material, it can always be referenced in a location 
on the ODFAUthors site.

 - Dennis

-Original Message-
From: TJ Frazier [mailto:tjfraz...@cfl.rr.com] 
Sent: Sunday, September 16, 2012 13:17
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [User Docs] What do we as a community want for user documentation 
or AOO

On 9/16/2012 14:04, Keith N. McKenna wrote:
[ ... ]

Hi, Keith,

As a long-time volunteer with ODFA (formerly OOA), I can promise that we 
(AOO) can get documents from them. The cost of this option is (1) a 
legal review and approval of CC-BY v3; (2) some storage (WG v3.2 is 15.5 
MB, so call it 100 or 200 MB per version, probably as .odt and .pdf 
files on the Mwiki. The download volume/bandwidth has been too low to 
cause any problems, but I have no stats); and (3) a little politeness.

If someone will handle Point (1), so that we have our ducks in a row, I 
will volunteer to handle Point (3). I can check on Point (2), but I 
don't think it's a problem.

/tj/
>
> I will look forward to your edits on the wiki and the doc site.
>
> As an aside, is there a developer snapshot available or 3.5 yet? I would
> like to start work on the Getting Started Guide on the ODFAuthors site
> and it makes sense to make edits based on 3.5 since that will be the
> most likely next release.
>
> Regards
> Keith
>
>
>

RE: What is a good Project Management Committee?

I think commitment is important.  After all, it is visible commitment and 
reliable conduct that leads to invitation of a contributor to become an ASF 
committer.  Demonstrated commitment through visible conduct is part of the 
determination of merit.

I do not equate that with trustworthiness.  In particular, in the narrow case 
of initial committers, I know of no case where an initial committer, in use of 
the privileges of a committer or in acting as a member of the PPMC, has 
demonstrated untrustworthiness. 

Trustworthiness is more difficult to demonstrate.  That depends on how someone 
conducts themselves when something goes wrong or when a mistake is made.  It 
might also depend on the care that is demonstrated for others and for the 
ultimate users of our work.

Let us not confuse commitment and trustworthiness.  

 - Dennis

LONGER REMARKS

It is the case that initial committers needed to satisfy a low bar with regard 
to commitment.  They needed to put their names on the proposal to create the 
podling before the voting began, they needed to submit an iCLA, and they needed 
to show up on the PPMC at least by subscribing to ooo-private and maintaining 
that subscription.  They are also expected to subscribe to ooo-dev, as are all 
committers.  

That's how the podling was bootstrapped.  Every podling is bootstrapped somehow.

Determination whether commitment is sustained or increased is evidently not a 
factor in how the ASF meritocracy operates.  There is no required level of 
subsequent visible commitment. For invited committers, this statement is in 
every invitation letter: 

  " Being a committer does not require you to participate any more 
than you already do. It does tend to make one even more committed.
You will probably find that you spend more time here."

There is nowhere a statement on their being some required level of sustained 
activity in order to retain the privileges of a committer.  There has not been 
any such condition placed on membership in the PPMC either.

If there is some sort of re-election (or reduction) of PPMC, there is the 
thorny question of whose votes are binding, yes?  There seems to be no 
avoidance of bootstrapping, even if the PPMC were to invite the mentors, or the 
IPMC to propose the PMC.  That's still bootstrapping.  That does not appear to 
be self-governance.  (Ultimately, the ASF Board will approve the PMC and PMC 
Chair, however it is arrived at.  This ratification will also be required for 
subsequent changes in the PMC and the PMC Chair.)

So, apart from all of the focus on skills and technical contribution, there 
remains this singular challenge: how does this project become demonstrably 
self-governing and recognized as fostering community?  I suggest that 
consensus-building in arrival at the proposed initial PMC and its Chair will be 
a central factor.


PS: I also find it quite remarkable when individuals that have been 
successfully brought in by invitation of the PPMC find the PPMC that did that 
to be untrustworthy.  Distrust strikes me as an unlikely foundation for a 
self-governing community.

-Original Message-
From: RGB ES [mailto:rgb.m...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Sunday, September 16, 2012 00:32
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org; orc...@apache.org
Subject: Re: What is a good Project Management Committee?

2012/9/16 Dennis E. Hamilton 

> I have no position on how the PMC is established.  I have no skin in the
> game.  I do expect that the manner of selection might need to be a
> demonstration that this project is self-governing and that it fosters
> community.
>
> I have no problem with whatever size PMC is chosen.
>
> I am, nevertheless, uncomfortable with the suggestion that the current
> PPMC "can't be considered as having the trust of the community."  I see no
> evidence of that.
>

Trust is also related with commitment: for example, can you trust a
politician that arrives to senator and then have a near 100 % of absences?
(unfortunately, that's a quite common situation on many countries...) If
someone wants to be on the Project *Management* Committee that someone must
show a real commitment with the project. If an initial committer did
nothing since editing that wiki page at the beginning of time, or if that
initial committer shows only now (and sporadically) when we are discussing
who will continue on the board, then that person do not deserve to be a PMC
member because that person will never obtain the needed trust. At least not
from me.

[ ... ]

RE: What is a good Project Management Committee?

Rob makes two points on my comments that I want to clarify:

 1. Concerning the handling of security vulnerability reports, that is not the 
same as "the community" and it has not stopped the growing of the PPMC.  It is 
the case that the size of the PPMC and the degree of inexperience were concerns 
to the ASF security team.  There was no evidence of untrustworthiness.  The 
creation of a small ooo-security group was prudent and security@ i.a.o insisted 
on that.  I also don't expect there to be any security@ objections to whatever 
PMC is formed.  I would expect an explosion of ooo-security participation to 
raise eyebrows at any time.

 2. I did not claim that the PPMC could not invite already-established 
committers to come aboard the PPMC. As far as I know, it has simply not done 
so.  It is the case, as Rob points out, that there is also nothing to prevent a 
committer invitation also including a PPMC invitation.  For the reasons Rob 
mentions, that hasn't been done lately.

 - Dennis

-Original Message-
From: Rob Weir [mailto:robw...@apache.org] 
Sent: Saturday, September 15, 2012 17:59
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: What is a good Project Management Committee?

On Sat, Sep 15, 2012 at 8:16 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton  wrote:
[ ... ]
> I am, nevertheless, uncomfortable with the suggestion that the current PPMC 
> "can't be considered as having the trust of the community."  I see no 
> evidence of that.
>

You might review the discussions related to the handling of security
vulnerability reports.  The self-selected PPMC was considered not
sufficiently trustworthy to handle these.

[ ... ]
>
> There might have been more additional committers on the PPMC, but the PPMC 
> has stopped inviting new committers to also be on the PPMC.  I don't recall 
> any individual originally invited to be a committer to have later been 
> invited to become a PPMC member.>

Your statement could easily be misunderstood.  The PPMC did not "stop
inviting" new PPMC members.  What happened is that we realized the bar
was too high to make new contributors both PPMC and Committer at once,
and that it would be faster/easier to bring new contributors in
initially as Committers, e.g., for translators who need access to
Pootle.   There is nothing that prevents a committer from also
becoming a PPMC member.

[ ... ]

RE: What is a good Project Management Committee?

I have no position on how the PMC is established.  I have no skin in the game.  
I do expect that the manner of selection might need to be a demonstration that 
this project is self-governing and that it fosters community.

I have no problem with whatever size PMC is chosen.

I am, nevertheless, uncomfortable with the suggestion that the current PPMC 
"can't be considered as having the trust of the community."  I see no evidence 
of that.  

In particular, I don't see any particular problem that the self-selected 
initial committers have created.  The conversation about the size of the PMC 
emerged from the PPMC itself.

Here's a little history:

Of the initial committers

 55 serve on the current PPMC (and all are committers)
 15 are committers only
 11 did not provide iCLAs and come on board

That PPMC has managed to support creation of the following, as of my last 
status report to this list:

 36 additional committers were successfully invited.

 18 of those are also serving on the current PPMC.

There might have been more additional committers on the PPMC, but the PPMC has 
stopped inviting new committers to also be on the PPMC.  I don't recall any 
individual originally invited to be a committer to have later been invited to 
become a PPMC member.

 - Dennis

-Original Message-
From: Andrea Pescetti [mailto:pesce...@apache.org] 
Sent: Saturday, September 15, 2012 15:08
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: What is a good Project Management Committee?

On 07/09/2012 Andrew Rist wrote:
[ ... ]

The current PPMC, especially due to the bootstrapping phase that allowed 
a large number of "initial committers" to enter the project without 
demonstrating merit, can't be considered as having the trust of the 
community.

> My Proposal for the next step in the PMC selection process:
> I suggest that each of us provide up to 10 names for the PMC. no
> spreadsheet - no voting - no '-1s' for now. Just an affirmative list of
> the 10 people you think should be doing the work of the PMC. ...
> We can use this to produce the next pass at the proposed PMC
> roster, hopefully a PMC of around 20 members.

This is a nice idea since it would guarantee that every PMC member is, 
directly or indirectly, trusted by the community, while still 
maintaining a manageable size for the PMC.

Of course, if we choose this way, then most of the current PPMC members 
won't be in the PMC; so it's important to guarantee that all volunteers 
can have a say in determining the future of the project; for example, 
the PMC would be committed to seeking consensus on ooo-dev rather than 
enforcing choices by using its binding votes. And the "rotation" idea 
from Rob makes sense too, if it can be implemented easily and with 
little impact on the project's governance continuity.

Regards,
   Andrea.

Amazon Download of Apache OpenOffice 3.4


On learning that Amazon.com is offering downloads of Apache OpenOffice, I was 
curious enough to go through the purchase ($0.00) and download process at 
.

Here's everything I noticed:

 1. OOPS #1: It says the product is for Vista / XP, with no other versions of 
Windows listed.

 2. It points to an Apache OpenOffice 3.4 for Mac [Open Souce Download} as also 
available.

 3. It has been offered since 2012-09-10 and was #352 in Software when I looked 
yesterday.  Just now it is #188 in Software and #71 in Software > Business & 
Office.There are no reviews yet.

 4. The www.openoffice.org/why page is used for the Product Description.

 5. OOPS #2: What's not so thrilling is the Sponsored Links that are offered as 
being also of potential interest.  These refer to 
openoffice-3.4.downloadster.net, openoffice.fm/suite, and 
openoffice.help-experts.com.  (That one is called OpenOffice 2012 Download.)

 6. Amazon has a Games and Software Library for users.  This can be used to 
re-download the software and also get product keys (not applicable for this 
one).   Out of curiosity, I followed that link and found that they are still 
holding tax-return software for the US 2008 tax year that I purchased and 
downloaded in 2009.  Now the Apache OpenOffice 3.4 is there now too.

 7. Amazon has their own downloader.  It is needed to retrieve software from 
the Games and Software Library.  I didn't install that, although it is needed 
to download from the library.

 8. Going through the one-click purchase of the $0.00 software, I was not sent 
the executable.  Instead, I was sent an "Amazon OpenOffice 34 by Apache" 
downloader executable.  I ran it.  It is a simple dialog with a progress bar, 
the gull button, and a message that the item can be downloaded again from my 
software library. It downloads the software.  It doesn't say where.

 9. When the downloader has completed, there is only an "Install" button and 
also a little pull-down button for viewing the download location.

 10. OOPS #3: I checked the download location.  The Windows download is to the 
User's desktop.

 11. OOPS #4: I used the option to open that folder.  The downloaded file is 
named "OpenOffice.exe".  That's it.  It needs to have a more distinctive 
filename, seems to me.

 12. I closed the download dialog, and was given an "Are you sure you want to 
quit without installing?" dialog.  I clicked the "Quit Now" button.

 13. I moved the "OpenOffice.exe" from my desktop to a shared-server folder 
where I keep all of my AOOi downloads and screen shots.  The file is 
135,933,721 bytes and I presume it is the same as 
Apache_OpenOffice_incubating_3.4.1_Win_x86_install_en-US.exe that is the AOOi 
3.4.1 release.  The gull-button download icon is shown with directory listings 
of the file.

 14. I checked my list of installed programs and the "Amazon OpenOffice 34 by 
Apache" downloader is nowhere to be seen.  My only Amazon software consists of 
the Amazon MP3 Downloader, the Amazon MP3 Uploader (the pair for transferring 
from/to Amazon Cloud Player) and Amazon Kindle. 

 15. The next time I ran an e-mail check, I received an Amazon.com Order 
Confirmation for my $0.00 purchase.  It also reminds me where I can go to 
download the software from my Games and Software Library at Amazon.com.

The use of the desktop for a temporary locations is pretty awful.  This is in 
addition to the fact that the default installer location of the setup files 
folder is also on the desktop.  I expected better of Amazon.  

Bonus Experiment

 16. I decided to go back to My Games and Software Library at amazon.com and 
install the Amazon Games & Software Downloader (for Windows XP/Vista/7), and 
see what that provides that might be better.  I got the usual IE warning about 
this not being downloaded much and also an administrative permission that 
indicated the code is not signed.  I got to name my PC (sort of what happens 
with Kindle software too).
 This lets me set the download location.  The default on Windows 7 is 
"C:\Users\Public\Documents\Amazon Games & Software".  I changed it to my user 
account Downloads folder.  It started my most-recent purchase or download (AOOi 
3.4.1) again, and I cancelled out of it.
  
 17. The Amazon Games & Software Downloader 2.0.2.0 is now in my Control Panel 
programs directory.  This strikes me as a superior solution to having the 
transient downloader that uses the desktop without giving me any control or 
even knowing in advance what would happen.  

 - Dennis

RE: Moderating ooo-private

With regard to inappropriate messages to ooo-private, I agree that it is a good 
idea to provide better information and to discourage the use of ooo-private for 
this kind of traffic.  I think one problem is that some folks want their 
request to be personal and all think they are (or want to be) reaching a 
support organization.

I conducted an experiment to see how the list rejects messages.  The bounce I 
received is the message immediately below.  The original request to ooo-private 
was returned in an attachment.  That is attached to this message but I don't 
know that it will be preserved on ooo-dev.  What that message is like is posted 
below the Rejection Message.

 - Dennis


  -Rejection Message-
From: ooo-private-ow...@incubator.apache.org 
[mailto:ooo-private-ow...@incubator.apache.org] 
Sent: Saturday, September 15, 2012 08:20
To: hims...@orcmid.com
Subject: Returned post for ooo-priv...@incubator.apache.org


Hi! This is the ezmlm program. I'm managing the
ooo-priv...@incubator.apache.org mailing list.

I'm sorry, your message (enclosed) was not accepted by the moderator.
If the moderator has made any comments, they are shown below.

>>>>>  >>>>>
This is a test rejection message from the ooo-private list robot.  This comment 
is supplied by the moderator.
The purpose of this test is to determine how useful reject messages or a 
replacement boilerplate could be helpful in directing users with problems to an 
appropriate place where they are likely to receive assistance.
<<<<<  <<<<<


  -Rejected Message-
From: hims...@orcmid.com [mailto:hims...@orcmid.com] 
Sent: Saturday, September 15, 2012 08:03
To: OOo-private Apache Incubator 
Subject: PLEASE REJECT THIS MESSAGE

Sorry about that.  I did not realize that orc...@msn.com was listed as 
subscribed.  Trying again.

-Original Message-
From: Dennis E. Hamilton [mailto:orc...@msn.com] 
Sent: Saturday, September 15, 2012 07:57
To: OOo-private Apache Incubator 
Subject: PLEASE REJECT THIS MESSAGE

This is a test request form an unsubscribed user.  It is being submitted to see 
how useful rejection messages are.  Please reject this message.  Please use the 
%%% markers and add a statement to the rejection message.

 - Dennis (orc...@apache.org)


--- Begin Message ---
Sorry about that.  I did not realize that orc...@msn.com was listed as 
subscribed.  Trying again.

-Original Message-
From: Dennis E. Hamilton [mailto:orc...@msn.com] 
Sent: Saturday, September 15, 2012 07:57
To: OOo-private Apache Incubator 
Subject: PLEASE REJECT THIS MESSAGE

This is a test request form an unsubscribed user.  It is being submitted to see 
how useful rejection messages are.  Please reject this message.  Please use the 
%%% markers and add a statement to the rejection message.

 - Dennis (orc...@apache.org)




--- End Message ---

RE: Moderating ooo-private

Concerning the use of a boiler-plate rejection message:

I have a concern about forcing users who may already be distressed and agitated 
to start over.  Also there are no "support channels" in the sense that most 
users will understand that.

As I recall, the reject message that is produced by the list is not so user 
friendly and that complicates matters.  We'll have to look into that.

Finally, this is more work for moderators to avoid multiple responses and to 
operate consistently no matter which moderator handles the message.

These factors need to be considered somehow.  

I'll produce a rejection message so it can be examined and it can be assessed.

 - Dennis

-Original Message-
From: Ross Gardler [mailto:rgard...@opendirective.com] 
Sent: Saturday, September 15, 2012 00:42
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Moderating ooo-private

Many user enquiries come to ooo-private and are moderated through. They
shouldn't be.  That list should have almost zero traffic.

Users are finding the list somehow, seems the documentation needs fixing.

For those that do find their way through consider rejecting them with a
boiler plate response directing to correct support channels.

Sent from my tablet
On Sep 15, 2012 4:37 AM, "Kirk Fraser"  wrote:

> Gentlemen,
>
> As a frequent contributor to a regional newspaper, I want to be able to
> import these .PDF documents so I can do searches for specific words to find
> what they say on issues of interest.
>
> http://www.gop.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/2012GOPPlatform.pdf
> http://assets.dstatic.org/dnc-platform/2012-National-Platform.pdf
>
> Yet when I tried, the import failed to capture and display the text seen
> in an Adobe reader.  So tell me, when will Open Office be able to import
> .PDF files like these?
>
> Thanks,
> Kirk W. Fraser
>
>

RE: Moderating AOO Public Lists - #2 Moderation

2012-09-10 Thread Dennis E. Hamilton

Thanks, TJ.  

That is a great point.  That can be done with our lists, too.

The only ones I reported, with considerable difficulty, were Linked In 
connection requests sent to ooo-private and ooo-users.

 - Dennis

-Original Message-
From: TJ Frazier [mailto:tjfraz...@cfl.rr.com] 
Sent: Monday, September 10, 2012 15:24
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: Moderating AOO Public Lists - #2 Moderation

[ ... ]

When moderating a couple of OO.o lists in their dying days, I took a 
more aggressive approach to spammers. If they were sending from any of 
the large U.S. ISPs (MS, Google, Yahoo, ATT, et al.) I would follow the 
complaint procedure to try to get the account closed. (This is a little 
different for the different companies: MS wants attachments, while 
others want pasted parts of the offending email.) MS in particular is 
polite about it; I'd get a note saying that the account has been closed. 
Others say thanks, but cite privacy regs, which I consider bogus; 
nonetheless, I don't recall ever getting any more spam from a 
complained-about account, if the ISP acked the complaint.

Note that this requires careful analysis of the internal headers: the 
main address is often munged, and you need to go way down to the last 
"received from" header. I have a little list of useful URLs to look up 
IP owners and ISP complaint addresses, if anybody wants it.

One real success was with a number of spammers from a .edu address. The 
admin I wrote to replied politely that the situation would be handled, 
and it was: their spam vanished.

This kind of work takes some time, but it makes the Net better for 
everybody, not just our ML.

/tj/

Moderating AOO Public Lists - #2 Moderation

2012-09-10 Thread Dennis E. Hamilton

[Part 2 of tips for list moderators]

MODERATION [AND PRIVATE-LIST SUBSCRIPTION] REQUESTS ARE SENT TO ALL MODERATORS

Since the request is sent as an e-mail, each moderator receives the same 
request. 

The first moderation wins.  You'll receive a notice if your moderation arrives 
when another moderator's action has already been taken.  That doesn't happen 
very often.

The moderation request has the message being moderated as an attachment.  Be 
careful with it.  

I will cover only moderation requests here.  Subscription requests for private 
lists are rather tricky.

1. SPAM DROPPING

If the message is clearly spam, IGNORE IT.  Using the moderation-request 
rejection option will send a message back to the original sender.  That is 
undesirable.  It confirms to spammers that they've reached a working e-mail 
address.  Don't do that.

2. OFF-PURPOSE MESSAGES

As a moderator, I don't make it my job to handle messages that appear 
legitimate but are sent to the wrong list.  List subscribers can do that.  And 
if this is happening too much, it suggests that something needs to be done to 
help submitters find the correct place more easily.

What I do is moderate the message onto the list.  I have rarely used the reject 
option, and only when I am confident the e-mail is from a legitimate sender.

There are two basic ways to moderate a message onto the list.  

 1. The message can be accepted in accordance with the instructions in the 
moderation-request e-mail.  That is a one-time acceptance.

 2. Another way is to accept that message and all future messages to the list 
from that sender.

The way to accept all messages from the sender is to make a REPLY ALL to the 
moderation-request message.  That is, your reply to the request is addressed to 
both the accept and the reject addresses.  (This solution is not always listed 
in the -help message.  It works though.) You will have to delete the 
"non-disclosed-recipients" e-mail address if that appears in your "Reply All" 
message.  

 3. An alternative is to send a rejection with explanation.  That is probably 
not great.  The messages from the robot are lengthy and cryptic.  It may be 
difficult for the original sender.

 4. Finally, you can reply to the attachment and be helpful directly.  I've 
done that.  I don't make a practice of it.  It moves response and awareness of 
the kinds of questions from the list to the moderator.  If you *do* do this, it 
is wise to copy -owner@ so that other moderators will know what 
happened.  It is also good to check the list to verify that some other 
moderator did not already allow the message through.

3. ON-PURPOSE MESSAGES

I recommend the second moderation-in technique for these.  This can also happen 
when a list subscriber uses a different e-mail than the one they have 
subscribed to the list.


 
Discussion?

 - Dennis

Moderating AOO Public Lists - #1 Setting Up

2012-09-10 Thread Dennis E. Hamilton

[To support current interest in lists and their moderation, I've compiled some 
tips on what to expect and how to operate as a moderator.  The version for 
private lists has been well-received.  I am now posting this public-list 
version for information and wider review.]

Here are some tips for starting as a moderator on any Apache OpenOffice public 
lists.  This may be old news for current moderators.  I am providing it for the 
benefit of newcomers and the curious.  After any improvements that are 
suggested, I'll consolidate these in a place where they can be found for future 
reference.

1. MODERATOR WORKLOAD

The mailing list moderation system is e-mail driven.  The needs for moderation 
arrive in the moderators in-box as messages from the list robot.  Moderators 
may also receive messages that are directed to them via the list's owner 
address (i.e., -owner@ incubator.apache.org).

It is not necessary to read the lists often or in their entirety.  It is useful 
to keep an eye on lists to ensure there is not some technical issue to report.  
Participating on the list is not a requirement for moderation.  Being a 
moderator does not even subscribe you to the list, although moderators of 
private lists certainly need to be subscribed to those lists.

There are only two kinds of moderator mails from the list robot: requests for 
approval of posts from non-subscribers and subscription requests (only for 
private lists).  On public lists, subscription does not require any moderator 
action and none is requested by the list robot.

2. MODERATOR E-MAIL ADDRESSES

When starting as a moderator, it is important to choose an e-mail address where 
you will receive moderator-directed mail.  It works best if this is an e-mail 
address that you can also use to send e-mail from.  If you use an e-mail 
address that is handled by a forwarding service, it is desirable for you to be 
able to send e-mail from an account of yours that allows that e-mail in the 
"From:" entry.

For ASF Committers, the ideal e-mail address is the Apache Account Name/ID 
address, @ apache.org.  

When a moderator e-mail is to be added, removed, or changed, the procedure is 
the same:

 * Open a JIRA task ticket on the Infrastructure project, with component 
"Mailing Lists."  This is usually done by a PPMC Member using 
.

 * Request any e-mail addresses to be removed (and at whose request/authority, 
if they are not yours).

 * Request any e-mail addresses to be added. 

 * TIP: To make this easier in managing your own address in the future, use an 
e-mail of a forwarding service where you can update the forwarding yourself 
without changing the e-mail address used by the mailing-list robot.  You can 
use the first step (below) to confirm that the forwarded e-mail address is 
recognized properly.

The JIRA tickets are usually acted-upon within 24 hours.

 
 3. THE FIRST STEP

The first new-moderator action is to send an e-mail to

   -help@ incubator.apache.org

Send that e-mail from an account that has your moderator-listed e-mail as its 
From: address.  (If there is no such account for sending, but you can receive 
at your moderator e-mail, use a sending e-mail account that allows you to 
specify a different From: address.)

When the e-mail robot recognizes that the request is from a moderator e-mail, 
it will send a moderator version of the list help message.  The subject will be 
"Moderator help for @ incubator.apache.org".

Save that e-mail.  

Remember how easy it is to do that again when needed.


 3. IF THIS DOESN'T WORK, send a note to the existing moderators at 
-owner@, and we'll see how to sort it out.  If there is no response 
within one day, communicate with one of the existing moderators to work with 
you in resolving the difficulty.



 - Dennis

RE: Volunteers needed to pickup some tasks

2012-09-09 Thread Dennis E. Hamilton

I think it is important to appreciate that project participation on 
ooo-security does require membership on the [P]PMC.  The security@ apache.org 
list also has oversight on ooo-security@ i.a.o. 

The work on ooo-security has accountability to the PPMC.  There are special 
arrangements that go with developing and slip-streaming fixes into releases and 
staging disclosure.  Even after repairs in a release are disclosed, much of the 
activity and many details remain behind-the-scenes.

In order to support intake of new ooo-security contributors, provide for backup 
of responsibilities within the team, and also clarify how the security team 
accounts to the [P]PMC, the working of these arrangements probably needs to be 
documented in some way (without discussing vulnerabilities themselves), 
including the approach to cooperation with those reporting 
vulnerabilities/exploits and coordination with other projects (mainly via the 
officesecurity@ lists.freedesktop.org list) on cases of mutual importance -- a 
common occurrence.  

 - Dennis

-Original Message-
From: Dave Fisher [mailto:dave2w...@comcast.net] 
Sent: Sunday, September 09, 2012 09:46
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: Volunteers needed to pickup some tasks

Hi,

Some comments on the coverage so far.

On Sep 7, 2012, at 10:50 PM, Rob Weir wrote:
[ ... ]

> 3. Taking the lead on the AOO Security team, tracking vulnerability
> reports, writing disclosure bulletins, coordinating with security
> analysts and related open source projects.

Here is where we need volunteers. This is an area where of necessity little is 
known of the activity until a release is made. It is a developer / tester area.

[ ... ]

RE: Volunteers needed to pickup some tasks

2012-09-08 Thread Dennis E. Hamilton

I will soon need to be replaced as a moderator on ooo-users@ and ooo-private@ 
(requires [P]PMC member) as I unwind activities that require daily attention.  
So two volunteers would be good for those list.  Then there can be overlap 
while they get the hang of it.

 - Dennis

-Original Message-
From: Rob Weir [mailto:rabas...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Friday, September 07, 2012 22:51
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Volunteers needed to pick up some tasks

[ ... ]

1. List moderation. I intend to stop moderating dev, users, marketing,
qa and private.

[ ... ]

Who am I in the Matter (was RE: What is a good PMC member?)

2012-09-07 Thread Dennis E. Hamilton

I notice that I have left something important unsaid.  So I am breaking into my 
weekend thread-penny piggy bank for one more post here today.  Then I will 
catch up on other matters.

First, I want to point folks to this important feature of The League of Crafty 
Guitarists:
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/League_of_Crafty_Guitarists#Courses>.  The 
motivation for New Standard Tuning is very impressive.  For development of 
software for more than its own sake, I think there is a fourth relationship to 
be developed.  For musicians, it might be in the relationship to music.  To be 
certain, I would add "develop a relationship with the experience of others with 
the music [the open-source software project]."

THE "WHO AM I" PART

I stand for anyone moved to participate in an open-source project being 
welcome, being honored for their contribution, being respected for their 
effort, and being thrilled to be involved.  I stand for no one left out who is 
willing to play.  I stand for the cultivation, encouragement, and flourishing 
of newcomers.

I promise that I will fulfill on that in any project where you encounter me.

I promise that when I fall short you can call me on it without repercussion.

I promise that when I mess up, I will clean it up.

You can count on it.

 - Dennis   

PS: <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PdLIerfXuZ4>



-Original Message-
From: Dennis E. Hamilton [mailto:orc...@apache.org] 
Sent: Friday, September 07, 2012 10:28
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: RE: What is a good Project Management Committee member?

I think the League of Crafty Guitarists is a brilliant metaphor.  Thanks Dave.  
I think it might be good to notice, as well, how audiences respond as 
participants in such a performance.

In pondering the question on this thread, I find that puzzling over roles may 
be off the mark.  I still want to know what would be the evidence of community 
by how others perceive and respond to the project atmosphere.  

Today, I will expend my thread-penny on this question:

   "What has anyone invited/moved to contribute here know they are welcome, 
know their contribution is honored, and are thrilled with being part of it?"

An easy way for anyone to address this question, especially the current 
committers and PPMC members, is to ask it of themselves.  Or we can ask it with 
someone else's name.  For example,

   "What has orcmid know he is welcome, know his contribution is honored, and
thrilled with being part of it?"

A greater challenge is having whatever that is work for anyone else I choose to 
name.  Rob, Kay, An, Andrea, Jürgen, Ma, and those who've not yet arrived  -- 
and have it work for me.

Since I'm on the PPMC, I have to ask myself this question,

   "What am I doing to create the [project] world in which I want to live?"

Then I get to deal with the gap between my own actions and how I say I want it 
to be.  That's where the not-good-news insights are available.  It's humbling.  
From there, the challenge is finding appropriate action that aligns who I am 
and how I act that offers up the world I want to live in.
 
 - Dennis

-Original Message-
From: Dave Fisher [mailto:dave2w...@comcast.net] 
Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2012 22:42
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: What is a good Project Management Committee member?


[ ... ]

>> Perhaps a better musical metaphor to aspire to might be Robert Fripp's The 
>> League of Crafty Guitarists [1] I hadn't thought of them for awhile, but I 
>> saw them live about 25 years ago. A big circle of guitarists sharing and 
>> passing on riffs.

Here the emphasis is on observation and passing the lead. The guitar players 
are in a circle and are watching each other.

Regards,
Dave

>> 
>> Regards,
>> Dave
>> 
>> [1] http://www.thelcg.net/music.html

RE: What is a good Project Management Committee member?

2012-09-07 Thread Dennis E. Hamilton

I think the League of Crafty Guitarists is a brilliant metaphor.  Thanks Dave.  
I think it might be good to notice, as well, how audiences respond as 
participants in such a performance.

In pondering the question on this thread, I find that puzzling over roles may 
be off the mark.  I still want to know what would be the evidence of community 
by how others perceive and respond to the project atmosphere.  

Today, I will expend my thread-penny on this question:

   "What has anyone invited/moved to contribute here know they are welcome, 
know their contribution is honored, and are thrilled with being part of it?"

An easy way for anyone to address this question, especially the current 
committers and PPMC members, is to ask it of themselves.  Or we can ask it with 
someone else's name.  For example,

   "What has orcmid know he is welcome, know his contribution is honored, and
thrilled with being part of it?"

A greater challenge is having whatever that is work for anyone else I choose to 
name.  Rob, Kay, An, Andrea, Jürgen, Ma, and those who've not yet arrived  -- 
and have it work for me.

Since I'm on the PPMC, I have to ask myself this question,

   "What am I doing to create the [project] world in which I want to live?"

Then I get to deal with the gap between my own actions and how I say I want it 
to be.  That's where the not-good-news insights are available.  It's humbling.  
From there, the challenge is finding appropriate action that aligns who I am 
and how I act that offers up the world I want to live in.
 
 - Dennis

-Original Message-
From: Dave Fisher [mailto:dave2w...@comcast.net] 
Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2012 22:42
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: What is a good Project Management Committee member?


[ ... ]

>> Perhaps a better musical metaphor to aspire to might be Robert Fripp's The 
>> League of Crafty Guitarists [1] I hadn't thought of them for awhile, but I 
>> saw them live about 25 years ago. A big circle of guitarists sharing and 
>> passing on riffs.

Here the emphasis is on observation and passing the lead. The guitar players 
are in a circle and are watching each other.

Regards,
Dave

>> 
>> Regards,
>> Dave
>> 
>> [1] http://www.thelcg.net/music.html

RE: What is a good Project Management Committee member?

2012-09-06 Thread Dennis E. Hamilton

I see two things happening on this thread:  Creation of a laundry list for what 
a PMC member should be.  A request for PPMC members to be introspective.

I suggest that there is a single issue that, if it were addressed instead, 
would unlock appreciation of what needs to be introduced in order for the 
podling to graduate.

The feedback offered to us is that this podling has failed to demonstrate 
self-governance (in the Apache Way of things), particularly with regard to 
healthy community building.  That's the feedback.  

It's not about technical skills, the quality of the code base, participation in 
various activities, none of those things.

Here are two questions that should be for someone to answer about us:

 1. What would be the visible evidence that the podling, with its PMC, is 
self-governing and healthy, with strong fostering of a sustainable community?

 2. In what ways do PMC members demonstrate their commitment to creation and 
sustaining of such a healthy self-governing project?

Here's one suggestion: Participants and contributors experience being welcome 
and valued.

Here's another: Suggestions and discussion is respectful with thoughtful 
consideration and honoring of all viewpoints.

I wager that others can say what would have them know they are in an exciting, 
thriving community.  What do you see?

I prefer affirmative qualities.  Sometimes it is necessary to also say what 
would not be evident.  Bull-dozing, hogging the microphone, etc.  I invite 
focus on positive qualities.  Perhaps there is a positive quality on how 
non-constructive behaviors are dealt with, though.

 - Dennis

-Original Message-
From: Juergen Schmidt [mailto:jogischm...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, September 05, 2012 21:56
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: What is a good Project Management Committee member?

Am Donnerstag, 6. September 2012 um 05:30 schrieb Rob Weir:
[ ... ]

... The idea is more that people start thinking about the PMC and what it does 
mean to be a member of it.
For example if a PPMC thinks that it is happy with the thinks it is doing and 
don't want to be in the final PMC for some reason this member can give us as 
signal.
>  
> For example we recently had a PPMC member who was derided by a Mentor
> for not being interested in the CMS. It was suggested that this was a
> failure as a PMC member. I disagree. It is fine to focus
> contributions in one area do long as one takes care to consider the
> community wide implications of those contributions and is helping to
> grow and support the community in that area.
>  
>  

I agree again and the question is how to find the strong PMC team. My thought 
with my email was that the current PPMC members help actively by reflecting 
their own role.
>  
> Think of an orchestra. We don't expect every player to play every
> instrument. But we do expect a musicianship, the ability to play your
> part well and in a way that fits with the others, knowing that you
> might have a solo sometimes, but at other times you might be playing
> harmony or even have a rest.
>  
>  

I like this comparison very much it fits perfect in our case.

[ ... ]

RE: What is a good Project Management Committee member?

2012-09-05 Thread Dennis E. Hamilton

Some musings:

 1. I notice that the cafeteria tray is getting very full with these items.  

 2. I wonder if using a wiki page would be better for consolidating the 
consideration of traits and distinguishing what a PMC member shall bring to the 
party beyond being a committer.

 3. The "Boy Scout Oath" came to mind for some reason.  Not that it is exactly 
what we are looking for, but it certainly provides a kind of elevator speech on 
what makes a Boy Scout.  I don't mean this for PMC, but it is interesting as a 
concept, not in detail.  This is what it is in the US, and what it was when I 
was a Scout some 60 years ago: 
.  It's interesting that 
the Boy Scout Motto is the same everywhere: "Be Prepared."

 4. FOCUS ON COMMUNITY BUILDING?  Something that has been a struggle on the 
PPMC is addressing the Podling's actual preparedness and qualification for 
graduation (the public sentiment that AOO is ready not being enough).  In 
grappling with how qualification is demonstrated in terms of what the ASF 
requires of a Top Level Project there is a serious question concerning how well 
the AOO PPMC fosters community and a healthy project.  It might be that this 
trait and how PMC members actively contribute to it is a critical place to 
focus.  It is a duty of the PMC, and it is above and beyond the technical 
skills of the individual members.  Without it, AOOi does not graduate.

 5. SO WHAT IS A HEALTHY, COMMUNITY-FOSTERING PROJECT?  What is meant by 
community?  Shane Curcuru's blog is named "Community Before Code."  What does 
that mean and what does the PMC and its membership bring to its fulfillment?

 6. I am willing to be perfectly clueless about this and ask those already 
steeped in the Apache Way for guidance.  Based on recent discussions with 
Shane, I think I see the AOO community a bit more broadly than he might.  But 
that doesn't matter.  I think the traits of interest aren't contingent on 
having agreement on community scope, but its healthy fostering.

What would that be?  And how is it manifest and evident to all onlookers?

 - Dennis

-Original Message-
From: Ian Lynch [mailto:ianrly...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, September 05, 2012 02:32
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: What is a good Project Management Committee member?

On 5 September 2012 09:40, Regina Henschel  wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> some time ago we expressed, that we think the project is ready to graduate.
> In the process of graduating, a proposal for a Project Management Committee
> (PMC) will be brought to the Apache Board. Although discussion about
> individual persons will not be done public, it is important to get a shared
> conviction about the criteria for our PMC members.
>
> You find information about project management and the role of the PMC in
> http://www.apache.org/foundation/how-it-works.html
>
> With permission of Jürgen Schmidt I will show his items:
> "For me a good PMC member is somebody
> - who is active and visible in the project. It's important that others
> can see or better are able to recognize valuable contributions.
> - who driving the project forward by helping others to join the project,
> or helping other in general to find their way in the project
> - who help to grow the eco-system and the popularity of the project, eg.
> increasing the user base by promoting the project actively on
> conferences, via new medias, etc.
> - who take responsibility for tasks that have to be done and that help
> to drive the project forward or that help to simply run it.
> - who is able to transport and communicate the vision of the project
> - who is able to prevent misbehaviour and misconduct on our main
> communication tool the mailing lists but also on our extended
> communication tools like social media
> - who is able to bring in new ideas in the project that opens even more
> opportunities to grow and to evolve
> - ..."
>
> And here my thoughts:
> A PMC member...
> ...is a person all can trust in.
> ...preserves overview about several areas.
> ...knows, who is expert in a special area, and encourage people from
> different areas to work together on a topic.
> ...is willing to guide a newcomer.
> ...can identify opposite directions in the community before things
> escalate.
> ...knows about formal requirements and about the Apache structure.
> ...has a vision about the direction of the project, but on the other
> hand accepts reasoned different development without being offended (?
> German "eingeschnappt")
> ...sets a good example in treating others and working for the project.
> ...is reliable.
> ...is willing to assume responsibility.
> ...puts his heart and passion into the project.
>
>
> Do you miss aspects? Do you think a special item is irrelevant? What is
> essential?

Is aware of the limitations of mailing lists in communication and
actively strives to communicate to engender positive feelings in the
audience.

Has thought care

RE: board report for Sept. 20, 2012

2012-09-04 Thread Dennis E. Hamilton

Minor correction:

The proposal is at 
down the list of reports in their alphabetical order.


 - Dennis

-Original Message-
From: Dave Fisher [mailto:dave2w...@comcast.net] 
Sent: Tuesday, September 04, 2012 20:50
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Cc: orc...@apache.org
Subject: Re: board report for Sept. 20, 2012

Hi,

> Thanks. I've essentially followed your suggestions. I hope that others will 
> review the wiki at 
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/2012+Sept before it is 
> moved to http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/June2012 on Wednesday.

The report has been moved to the incubator wiki. Please let us know if you 
think anything should be edited.

Regards,
Dave

[ ... ]

RE: board report for Sept. 20, 2012

2012-09-03 Thread Dennis E. Hamilton

Reviewing the June report I have this to offer for September:

A. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT

This says there were 13 new Committers/PPMC members and 2 committer/PPMC member 
resignations.  I don't track resignations, and I think it is best to show the 
baseline (or resulting levels) of those changes.  I am assuming that my June 5, 
2012 Status was the basis for the numbers in the June 8 report to the IPMC and 
Board.

Comparing that with the report from yesterday, I would say that 

"There are now 110 committers with 72 of those on the PPMC.  Relative to the 
last report, that is an increase of 15 committers and a decrease of 3 
committers on the PPMC (following an audit to reconcile subscribers to the 
ooo-private mailing list)."

Now the numbers are grounded and the baseline here makes the derivation of 
details in a further report easy to substantiate.

B. A DIFFERENT OVERSIGHT

It is stunning that of all the matters that it might be thought the Board might 
need to be aware of (whether or not called to act on) the only one I've ever 
noticed is the June statement about leaks from the ooo-private list to "outside 
agencies".  

Along with that June issue, there is our promise to provide an update in the 
next report (this one in September 2012) or at least indicate that an update 
was provided separately.  The current draft simply removes any evidence that 
this issue was raised.  I suggest that there needs to be accountability and 
closure on our part.

I paid little attention to that issue.  I would suggest that the single leak 
was identified and the matter has been closed to the satisfaction of the PPMC.

 - Dennis

-Original Message-
From: Dave Fisher [mailto:dave2w...@comcast.net] 
Sent: Monday, September 03, 2012 18:16
To: dennis.hamil...@acm.org
Cc: OOo-dev Apache Incubator 
Subject: Re: board report for Sept. 20, 2012

On Sep 3, 2012, at 5:24 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:

> Dave, I don't know what the baseline was for the last report, so I have no 
> idea what the deltas are.  Where is the previous report to the IPMC?

http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/June2012

It was written June 8.

Regards,
Dave

> 
> - Dennis
> 
> PS: I may have provided that previous data, but it was a while ago [;<).
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Dave Fisher [mailto:dave2w...@comcast.net] 
> Sent: Monday, September 03, 2012 16:12
> To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Cc: dennis.hamil...@acm.org Hamilton
> Subject: Re: board report for Sept. 20, 2012
> 
> 
> On Sep 2, 2012, at 1:31 PM, Kay Schenk wrote:
> 
>> 
>> 
>> On 09/01/2012 11:26 AM, Dave Fisher wrote:
>>> 
>>> On Sep 1, 2012, at 9:50 AM, Kay Schenk wrote:
>>> 
>>>> On Fri, Aug 31, 2012 at 5:48 PM, Dave Fisher  wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> We are not a TLP the board report is to the IPMC and needs to be ready
>>>>> much, much sooner than two days before the board meeting.
>>>>> 
>>>>> We need to have this ready by a date like September 12.
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Oh my! You are SO right...here is the message from June...
>>>> 
>>>> http://markmail.org/message/7td2rgws7gnkoxo5
>>>> 
>>>> so, this will need to be ready like  Sept 6th! WOW! That is very soon.
>>> 
>>> The report page is ready at http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/September2012
>>> 
>>> Due on Wednesday Sept. 5.
>>> 
>>> I copied the June report and made some changes to 
>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/2012+Sept
>>> 
>>> There is more to be done. Please feel free to edit.
>>> 
>>> Regards,
>>> Dave
>>> 
>> 
>> Thanks for getting this started, Dave.
>> 
>> I made a few more changes...some facts need review and, of course, we could 
>> always use more input...
> 
> I made a additional changes as well. I think that the report is overly long 
> and we can lose the detail at the bottom.
> 
> Dennis - would you confirm the PPMC change statement.
> 
> Thanks,
> Dave
> 
>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> The IPMC will review the report. We should be discussing our graduation
>>>>> plans.
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> absolutely!
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> The report will go here: 
>>>>> http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/September2012when that page is created.
>>>>> 
>>>>> With my IPMC hat,
>>>>> Dave
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>> Thank you for the rather critical correction!
>>>

RE: board report for Sept. 20, 2012

2012-09-03 Thread Dennis E. Hamilton

Dave, I don't know what the baseline was for the last report, so I have no idea 
what the deltas are.  Where is the previous report to the IPMC?

 - Dennis

PS: I may have provided that previous data, but it was a while ago [;<).

-Original Message-
From: Dave Fisher [mailto:dave2w...@comcast.net] 
Sent: Monday, September 03, 2012 16:12
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Cc: dennis.hamil...@acm.org Hamilton
Subject: Re: board report for Sept. 20, 2012


On Sep 2, 2012, at 1:31 PM, Kay Schenk wrote:

> 
> 
> On 09/01/2012 11:26 AM, Dave Fisher wrote:
>> 
>> On Sep 1, 2012, at 9:50 AM, Kay Schenk wrote:
>> 
>>> On Fri, Aug 31, 2012 at 5:48 PM, Dave Fisher  wrote:
>>> 
 We are not a TLP the board report is to the IPMC and needs to be ready
 much, much sooner than two days before the board meeting.
 
 We need to have this ready by a date like September 12.
 
>>> 
>>> Oh my! You are SO right...here is the message from June...
>>> 
>>> http://markmail.org/message/7td2rgws7gnkoxo5
>>> 
>>> so, this will need to be ready like  Sept 6th! WOW! That is very soon.
>> 
>> The report page is ready at http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/September2012
>> 
>> Due on Wednesday Sept. 5.
>> 
>> I copied the June report and made some changes to 
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/2012+Sept
>> 
>> There is more to be done. Please feel free to edit.
>> 
>> Regards,
>> Dave
>> 
> 
> Thanks for getting this started, Dave.
> 
> I made a few more changes...some facts need review and, of course, we could 
> always use more input...

I made a additional changes as well. I think that the report is overly long and 
we can lose the detail at the bottom.

Dennis - would you confirm the PPMC change statement.

Thanks,
Dave

> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
 The IPMC will review the report. We should be discussing our graduation
 plans.
 
>>> 
>>> absolutely!
>>> 
>>> 
 
 The report will go here: 
 http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/September2012when that page is created.
 
 With my IPMC hat,
 Dave
 
 
>>> Thank you for the rather critical correction!
>>> 
 
 On Aug 31, 2012, at 4:53 PM, Kay Schenk wrote:
 
> In June, we all worked together via e-mail on the Board report to
 incubator, and  I think most of us agreed that worked pretty well. But, I
 thought we could find a better contribution mechanism rather than e-mail
 and editing my one person.
> 
> We have another quarterly report that will be due Sept 20. I've put a
 new page (empty) on the Planning Wiki containing 2 child pages -- the June
 report and an empty Sept placeholder. Hopefully, we can use the June report
 as a template and collectively contribute to the Sept report before its due
 date of Sept 18 (two days before the Board meeting). Please contribute as
 you see fit.
> 
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Board+Reports
> --
> 
> MzK
> 
> "A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion,
> butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet,
> balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying,
> take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations,
> analyze a new problem,  pitch manure, program a computer, cook a
> tasty  meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly.
> Specialization is for insects."
>-- Robert Heinlein, "Time Enough For Love"
 
 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> --
>>> 
>>> MzK
>>> 
>>> "A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion,
>>> butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet,
>>> balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying,
>>> take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations,
>>> analyze a new problem,  pitch manure, program a computer, cook a
>>> tasty  meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly.
>>> Specialization is for insects."
>>> -- Robert Heinlein, "Time Enough For Love"
>> 
> 
> -- 
> 
> MzK
> 
> "A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion,
> butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet,
> balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying,
> take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations,
> analyze a new problem,  pitch manure, program a computer, cook a
> tasty  meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly.
> Specialization is for insects."
> -- Robert Heinlein, "Time Enough For Love"

2012-09-02 Status: PPMC and Committer Roster

2012-09-02 Thread Dennis E. Hamilton

As of the end of day 2012-09-01, the Apache OpenOffice podling
has 110 committers, with 72 on the PPMC.

Since the previous, 2012-08-02 report, there is an increase of 
1 committer and 1 PPMC member.

CURRENT PPMC AND COMMITTER STATUS

   1 champion
   5 mentor
   1 mentor/committer
  72 PPMC (all currently committers)
  37 committer (including 18 eligible PPMC)
   6 other
 122 total = pending PPMC? + complete + authz statuses

PENDING ACTIONS

   0 invite
   0 accepted?
   0 iCLA?
   0 ID chosen?
   1 ID pending (to be committer when completed)
   1 authz
  18 PPMC?
 103 complete
  34 other
 157 total

-Original Message-
From: Dennis E. Hamilton [mailto:orc...@apache.org] 
Sent: Friday, August 03, 2012 14:28
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: 2012-08-02 Status: PPMC and Committer Roster

As of the end of day, 2012-08-02, the Apache OpenOffice podling
has 109 committers, with 72 on the PPMC.

Since the previous, 2012-07-01 report, there is an increase of
8 committers, with no change on the PPMC.

CURRENT PPMC AND COMMITTER STATUS

   1 champion
   5 mentor
   1 mentor/committer
  72 PPMC (all currently committers)
  36 committer (including 18 eligible PPMC)
   7 other
 122 total = pending PPMC? + complete + authz statuses

PENDING ACTIONS

   0 invite
   0 accepted?
   0 iCLA?
   0 ID chosen?
   0 ID pending
   5 authz
  18 PPMC?
  99 complete
  34 other
 156 total



 [ ... ]


smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature

RE: [VOTE] Apache OpenOffice Community Graduation Vote

2012-08-27 Thread Dennis E. Hamilton

I'm not asking for anything.  I am simply attempting to clarify what the 
considerations are.  Also, I did not inject the issue about binaries into the 
discussion on general@ i.a.o.

Why do you find it necessary to put my contributions down rather than let them 
go by if you see no value in them?

 - Dennis

-Original Message-
From: Joe Schaefer [mailto:joe_schae...@yahoo.com] 
Sent: Monday, August 27, 2012 10:58
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org; orc...@apache.org
Cc: j...@jagunet.com
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache OpenOffice Community Graduation Vote

Why do persist in hijacking this thread Dennis?
Read the Subject again and ask yourself why you
are pursuing this line of inquiry here again-
it's just confusing people because you're asking
for new policy to be written and adopted at the
same time other people are arguing with each other
about current policy and how it applies to AOO.

Just let this discussion die please without further
ado- you need not reply again here to acknowledge
my request.

    From: Dennis E. Hamilton 
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org 
Cc: j...@jagunet.com 
Sent: Monday, August 27, 2012 1:52 PM
Subject: RE: [VOTE] Apache OpenOffice Community Graduation Vote

There is a missing distinction here.

The discussion about signed binaries is not about external signatures 
of the kind used by release managers and others, nor about the external digests 
and signatures that might be obtained in conjunction with a download.

The signing of code that I am talking about, and that others are 
talking about (at least in part), has to do with embedded signatures that 
consumer operating systems notice and check and that are part of the artifact.  
These signatures are used (and typically required for application 
certification) by Microsoft, Apple, Adobe, and others.  The requirement for 
them is not decreasing.

The discussion with regard to trust and the presumed reputation of the 
signer has merit, but it is not satisfied by external signatures in the case of 
download distributions to modern consumer platforms.

- Dennis

PS: I love it that when recognized authorities ask that a discussion be 
moved off of a particular list and then everyone piles on that list with a 
vengeance.  This message is *not* being copied to general@ i.a.o.  

-Original Message-
From: Joe Schaefer [mailto:joe_schae...@yahoo.com] 
Sent: Monday, August 27, 2012 10:07
To: gene...@incubator.apache.org
Cc: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache OpenOffice Community Graduation Vote

Which better agrees with written policy anyway- the sigs
are part of the release package to be voted on and voted on
by the PMC, so even tho it constitutes individual sigs
those sigs (well at least the RM's sig) are PMC-approved.

- Original Message -
> From: Greg Stein 
> To: gene...@incubator.apache.org
> Cc: "ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org" 
> Sent: Monday, August 27, 2012 1:03 PM
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache OpenOffice Community Graduation Vote
> 
> On Aug 27, 2012 9:57 AM, "Jim Jagielski"  
> wrote:
>> ...
>>  But recall in all this that even when the PMC releases code, it is
>>  signed by the individual RM, and not by the PMC itself.
> 
> Apache Subversion releases tend to have a half-dozen signatures. 
Thus, I'd
> say they are signed by the PMC. For example:
> 
> 
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/subversion/subversion-1.7.6.tar.bz2.asc
> 
> Cheers,
> -g
>

RE: AOO and Code Signing (was Re: [VOTE] Apache OpenOffice ... )

2012-08-27 Thread Dennis E. Hamilton

Great question, Jim,

1. The first substantial difference is that the operating system that runs the 
binary installer *always* and automatically checks the embedded signature and 
warns users when there is no such signature or when the signature is not from a 
trusted source (in the PKI Certificate Authority sense) or, of course, when the 
signature does not verify.  Download utilities can also verify signatures 
without needing to be party to any special out-of-band signature-checking 
practice.  

This is different than a web of trust that is centered around ASF committers 
who use OpenPGP signatures and that require super-user skills to arrange to 
check independently.  Also, the ASF signature practice applies to the top-level 
container (whether the source package or a binary package) and not to any of 
the interior components, leading to (2):

2. The second substantial difference is that embedded signature(s) remain with 
the individual binary artifact(s) (i.e., the installed .exe, .dll, and other 
artifacts that have provision for embedded signatures).  That is, it is not 
just the wrapper (e.g., the msi installer file) of the binary download that is 
signed, but signable components that are extracted, installed, and registered 
with the system. 

After that, it is possible for an user to ask to check the signature on an 
artifact simply by opening the Properties dialog on a file-system entry.  For 
various security conditions, signatures will also be checked dynamically and 
also by intrusion-detection software. 

3. These signatures also have expirations and there is provision to check for 
certificate revocation.  There are ways that can work with OpenPGP although I 
don't happen know how that is supported with the ASF committer signatures. In 
the case of embedded signatures, certificates can be checked for revocation or 
expiration at any time.  Finally, there is the ability to have time-service 
counter-signatures that tighten the non-repudiation aspects.  These provisions 
are second-order to the key feature, which is automatic artifact-level 
authentication and integrity.

The ASF approach does not fit into these regimes, which apply to Microsoft 
binary artifacts, signed Java jars, Apple OS X installs, Adobe AIR apps, etc., 
etc.

I am not arguing that the ASF should accommodate these arrangements.  If I used 
"requirement" it was not about anything to do with ASF but what platform 
providers are increasingly requiring for certification of installable binaries. 
 (It came up around AOOi when certification for Windows 8 was investigated.)  

I simply want to make it clear what these signing arrangements are and how they 
differ from what ASF uses as an internal control and as a way to manually 
obtain a check on the integrity of a download.  

 - Dennis

Of course, an independent packager could do all of this using a custom build 
chain.  The Sun/Oracle-packaged OpenOffice.org binaries were signed in this 
manner.  My downloads of TortoiseSVN for Windows x86 and x64 configurations are 
all signed in this manner by their creator, Stefan Kueng.  I am pleased to see 
that.  I even send money on occasion. By the way, the accompanying Tortoise SVN 
certificate indicates what is being attested to by the presence of the 
signature.  In the Tortoise SVN case it is to ensure software came from the 
software publisher and to protect the software from alteration after 
publication.  That is all.

-Original Message-
From: Jim Jagielski [mailto:j...@jagunet.com] 
Sent: Monday, August 27, 2012 11:02
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org; orc...@apache.org
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache OpenOffice Community Graduation Vote

And so I get back to my question... How is this new "requirement" substantially
different from the kind of signing we do today?

And please notice the word "substantially".

On Aug 27, 2012, at 1:52 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton  wrote:

> There is a missing distinction here.
> 
> The discussion about signed binaries is not about external signatures of the 
> kind used by release managers and others, nor about the external digests and 
> signatures that might be obtained in conjunction with a download.
> 
> The signing of code that I am talking about, and that others are talking 
> about (at least in part), has to do with embedded signatures that consumer 
> operating systems notice and check and that are part of the artifact.  These 
> signatures are used (and typically required for application certification) by 
> Microsoft, Apple, Adobe, and others.  The requirement for them is not 
> decreasing.
> 
> The discussion with regard to trust and the presumed reputation of the signer 
> has merit, but it is not satisfied by external signatures in the case of 
> download distributions to modern consumer platforms.
> 
> - Dennis
> 
> PS: I love it that when recognized authorities ask that a discussio

RE: [VOTE] Apache OpenOffice Community Graduation Vote

2012-08-27 Thread Dennis E. Hamilton

There is a missing distinction here.

The discussion about signed binaries is not about external signatures of the 
kind used by release managers and others, nor about the external digests and 
signatures that might be obtained in conjunction with a download.

The signing of code that I am talking about, and that others are talking about 
(at least in part), has to do with embedded signatures that consumer operating 
systems notice and check and that are part of the artifact.  These signatures 
are used (and typically required for application certification) by Microsoft, 
Apple, Adobe, and others.  The requirement for them is not decreasing.

The discussion with regard to trust and the presumed reputation of the signer 
has merit, but it is not satisfied by external signatures in the case of 
download distributions to modern consumer platforms.

 - Dennis

PS: I love it that when recognized authorities ask that a discussion be moved 
off of a particular list and then everyone piles on that list with a vengeance. 
 This message is *not* being copied to general@ i.a.o.  

-Original Message-
From: Joe Schaefer [mailto:joe_schae...@yahoo.com] 
Sent: Monday, August 27, 2012 10:07
To: gene...@incubator.apache.org
Cc: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache OpenOffice Community Graduation Vote

Which better agrees with written policy anyway- the sigs
are part of the release package to be voted on and voted on
by the PMC, so even tho it constitutes individual sigs
those sigs (well at least the RM's sig) are PMC-approved.

- Original Message -
> From: Greg Stein 
> To: gene...@incubator.apache.org
> Cc: "ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org" 
> Sent: Monday, August 27, 2012 1:03 PM
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache OpenOffice Community Graduation Vote
> 
> On Aug 27, 2012 9:57 AM, "Jim Jagielski"  
> wrote:
>> ...
>>  But recall in all this that even when the PMC releases code, it is
>>  signed by the individual RM, and not by the PMC itself.
> 
> Apache Subversion releases tend to have a half-dozen signatures. Thus, I'd
> say they are signed by the PMC. For example:
> 
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/subversion/subversion-1.7.6.tar.bz2.asc
> 
> Cheers,
> -g
>

RE: svn commit: r1377482 - /incubator/ooo/trunk/main/external_deps.lst

I concur with Rob's analysis here (quoted below).

It occurs to me that there is another spanner in the works.  This will impact 
whatever the signing process is.

Namely: Not only does the installer need to be signed, but those *installed* 
components (e.g., .exe and .dll files) that can bear embedded, OS-recognized 
signatures need to be signed if products of the build from source.  In the case 
of bundled third-party components that are installed as-is, they may need to be 
signed by their originator as well.

This is part of the authenticity provision.  It has an important provision in 
determining whether or not a component has been altered or replaced after 
installation.  (In the case of drivers and other components, the OS may be 
fussier than that.)  This is also important if component-level replacement by 
patches is introduced.

I don't know that all of this has to be swallowed at once.  I is going to be a 
factor in the future and it would be good to take preparatory action.  

I expect that the bar will be raised on extensions too, and that might be 
handled by upgrading .oxt to use ODF 1.2 packaging, relying on the digital 
signature provisions that are already there for packages and special components 
such as scripts and macros.

 - Dennis

-Original Message-
From: Rob Weir [mailto:robw...@apache.org] 
Sent: Sunday, August 26, 2012 13:47
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: svn commit: r1377482 - /incubator/ooo/trunk/main/external_deps.lst


[ ... ]

My point is that if we seek to have build-bot automated signed
binaries it is entirely foreseeable that what we're proposing to do
with 3rd party dependencies will also be out of policy, due to the
security concerns.  To do this we'll need to do more than just link to
random sites on the web for dependencies.

[ ... ]

Look at Andre's note from August 3rd.   First locations searched for
dependencies is the original website where it is hosted.  Then it
checks Apache Extras.  Then it checks SVN.   Taking SVN out of the
loop solves one issue.  But we still have the other issue -- I think
Dennis groks this as well -- that our primary search location is less
secure than the alternatives.

[ ... ], two relatively simple improvements:

1) Search Apache Extras first

or

2) Have the current script verify a detached signature rather than
relying on MD5 hashes


[ ... ]

RE: svn commit: r1377482 - /incubator/ooo/trunk/main/external_deps.lst

I haven't said anything about modifications to an upstream source.  That's an 
entirely different problem.

I'm talking about dependencies on someone else's binaries of any kind. 

 - Dennis

PS: In my own analysis, I probably should have mentioned bundled extensions 
too, although that seems to be a rather AOO-specific case.  At some point, the 
entire extension provenance and authenticity case *will* come under scrutiny.

-Original Message-
From: Dave Fisher [mailto:dave2w...@comcast.net] 
Sent: Sunday, August 26, 2012 12:57
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: svn commit: r1377482 - /incubator/ooo/trunk/main/external_deps.lst


On Aug 26, 2012, at 12:47 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:

> +1 on preserving the provenance and integrity of binary dependencies.
> 
> I'd go with external signatures *and* hosting the specific artifacts on a 
> reliable ASF location for preservation along with all ASF project sources 
> that depended on those specific artifacts in any sort of review, release of 
> authenticated binaries, etc.

There is nothing to say that we can't make our modifications with code from svn 
and base code stored in a reliable location. We can then push this to either 
extras and/or maven central.

Regards,
Dave

> 
> - Dennis
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Rob Weir [mailto:robw...@apache.org] 
> Sent: Sunday, August 26, 2012 12:38
> To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: svn commit: r1377482 - 
> /incubator/ooo/trunk/main/external_deps.lst
> 
> On Sun, Aug 26, 2012 at 3:20 PM, Dave Fisher  wrote:
>> Hi,
>> 
>> We need to do more work to have proper compliance with Apache Infrastructure 
>> policy in managing external dependencies.
>> 
>> I may not be precisely correct and am looking for confirmation, but In 
>> general i think we need to
>> 
>> (1) Completely avoid using svn.apache.org. I don't think we are allowed to 
>> do this even as a backup URL.
>> 
>> (2) Use mirrors or maven for ASF dependencies where we use the current 
>> release. If we use mirrors then archive.apache.org should be the backup for 
>> the mirror so that we aren't in trouble if the project has a release. If a 
>> maven repository were used then there would be no issue.
>> 
>> (3) If we use mirrors then we should allow the user to choose which mirror.
>> 
>> If we decide to take the time to go the maven route. I can use the example 
>> of ant and maven repos from the Apache POI build.xml.
>> 
>> Notes about maven repos. Infra [1], maven central [2] and example of an 
>> externally hosted repo [3]
>> 
>> This area needs careful attention.
>> 
> 
> Note that this move is exactly the wrong thing to do if we want have
> buildbots build binaries that are assumed to be safe and therefore
> signable.  Instead of the security and verifiability of ASF-run host,
> we're putting the dependencies off to a dozen different remote sites,
> with no visibility into their site's mechanisms for vetting changes,
> access controls, auditability of changes, even basics like ensuring
> domain names are renewed and not poached by others.
> 
> Do we really think other websites are as secure as the ones that Infra
> operates?  If so we should move the source code to the other sites as
> well, right?
> 
> No easy resolution of this, but we might mitigate the risk by putting
> all of the dependencies to Apache-Extras and load from there
> primarily.  And if at all possible make sure all change notifications
> from there get echoed to the ooo-committs lis.   We have a better
> chance of exercising now screwing up if we control rather than having
> multiple 3rd parties control.
> 
> Another option would be to use cryptographic means to ensure the
> integrity of the remote dependencies, e.g., detached signatures. That
> doesn't protect us from another website going down, temporarily or
> permanently, but it does allow us to verify that what we are
> downloading has not been tampered with.
> 
> -Rob
> 
> 
>> The current script is here: main/solenv/bin/download_external_dependencies.pl
>> 
>> Regards,
>> Dave
>> 
>> [1] http://apache.org/dev/repository-faq.html  and
>> [2] http://maven.apache.org/guides/mini/guide-central-repository-upload.html
>> [3] 
>> http://repo.maven.apache.org/maven2/javax/activation/activation/1.0.2/activation-1.0.2.pom
>> 
>> 
>> On Aug 26, 2012, at 11:58 AM, w...@apache.org wrote:
>> 
>>> Author: wave
>>> Date: Sun Aug 26 18:58:08 2012
>>> New Revision: 1377482
>>> 
>>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1377482&view=rev
>

RE: svn commit: r1377482 - /incubator/ooo/trunk/main/external_deps.lst

+1 on preserving the provenance and integrity of binary dependencies.

I'd go with external signatures *and* hosting the specific artifacts on a 
reliable ASF location for preservation along with all ASF project sources that 
depended on those specific artifacts in any sort of review, release of 
authenticated binaries, etc.

 - Dennis

-Original Message-
From: Rob Weir [mailto:robw...@apache.org] 
Sent: Sunday, August 26, 2012 12:38
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: svn commit: r1377482 - /incubator/ooo/trunk/main/external_deps.lst

On Sun, Aug 26, 2012 at 3:20 PM, Dave Fisher  wrote:
> Hi,
>
> We need to do more work to have proper compliance with Apache Infrastructure 
> policy in managing external dependencies.
>
> I may not be precisely correct and am looking for confirmation, but In 
> general i think we need to
>
> (1) Completely avoid using svn.apache.org. I don't think we are allowed to do 
> this even as a backup URL.
>
> (2) Use mirrors or maven for ASF dependencies where we use the current 
> release. If we use mirrors then archive.apache.org should be the backup for 
> the mirror so that we aren't in trouble if the project has a release. If a 
> maven repository were used then there would be no issue.
>
> (3) If we use mirrors then we should allow the user to choose which mirror.
>
> If we decide to take the time to go the maven route. I can use the example of 
> ant and maven repos from the Apache POI build.xml.
>
> Notes about maven repos. Infra [1], maven central [2] and example of an 
> externally hosted repo [3]
>
> This area needs careful attention.
>

Note that this move is exactly the wrong thing to do if we want have
buildbots build binaries that are assumed to be safe and therefore
signable.  Instead of the security and verifiability of ASF-run host,
we're putting the dependencies off to a dozen different remote sites,
with no visibility into their site's mechanisms for vetting changes,
access controls, auditability of changes, even basics like ensuring
domain names are renewed and not poached by others.

Do we really think other websites are as secure as the ones that Infra
operates?  If so we should move the source code to the other sites as
well, right?

No easy resolution of this, but we might mitigate the risk by putting
all of the dependencies to Apache-Extras and load from there
primarily.  And if at all possible make sure all change notifications
from there get echoed to the ooo-committs lis.   We have a better
chance of exercising now screwing up if we control rather than having
multiple 3rd parties control.

Another option would be to use cryptographic means to ensure the
integrity of the remote dependencies, e.g., detached signatures. That
doesn't protect us from another website going down, temporarily or
permanently, but it does allow us to verify that what we are
downloading has not been tampered with.

-Rob

> The current script is here: main/solenv/bin/download_external_dependencies.pl
>
> Regards,
> Dave
>
> [1] http://apache.org/dev/repository-faq.html  and
> [2] http://maven.apache.org/guides/mini/guide-central-repository-upload.html
> [3] 
> http://repo.maven.apache.org/maven2/javax/activation/activation/1.0.2/activation-1.0.2.pom
>
>
> On Aug 26, 2012, at 11:58 AM, w...@apache.org wrote:
>
>> Author: wave
>> Date: Sun Aug 26 18:58:08 2012
>> New Revision: 1377482
>>
>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1377482&view=rev
>> Log:
>> one more small step to infra compliance. still to do removing use of svn as 
>> a backup and for current releases of ASF software the archive is not proper 
>> - either a mirror or the maven repository is required.
>>
>> Modified:
>>incubator/ooo/trunk/main/external_deps.lst
>>
>> Modified: incubator/ooo/trunk/main/external_deps.lst
>> URL: 
>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/ooo/trunk/main/external_deps.lst?rev=1377482&r1=1377481&r2=1377482&view=diff
>> ==
>> --- incubator/ooo/trunk/main/external_deps.lst (original)
>> +++ incubator/ooo/trunk/main/external_deps.lst Sun Aug 26 18:58:08 2012
>> @@ -72,7 +72,7 @@ if ( true )
>> if (SOLAR_JAVA == TRUE)
>> MD5 = 17960f35b2239654ba608cf1f3e256b3
>> name = lucene-2.9.4-src.tar.gz
>> -URL1 = 
>> http://www.us.apache.org/dist/lucene/java/2.9.4/lucene-2.9.4-src.tar.gz
>> +URL1 = 
>> http://archive.apache.org/dist/lucene/java/2.9.4/lucene-2.9.4-src.tar.gz
>> URL2 = $(OOO_EXTRAS)$(MD5)-$(name)
>> # Fall back to a version in SVN from a previous revsion.
>> URL3 = 
>> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/!svn/bc/1337615/incubator/ooo/trunk/ext_sources/$(MD5)-$(name)
>>
>>
>

FW: [VOTE] Apache OpenOffice Community Graduation Vote

FYI, concerning the matter of binaries distributed by the Apache OpenOffice 
project.

I neglected to consider a case that Dave Fisher just raised here on ooo-dev: 
Where the binary dependencies relied upon in an Apache OpenOffice binary 
distribution are accessed from at build time and where those are identifiably 
preserved for purposes of replication/confirmation and also for any future 
forensic need.  That is an element in my topic (2) below.

Please do not comment on the general@ i.a.o thread.  It is a zombie in the 
process of being burned at the stake.

 - Dennis

-Original Message-
From: Dennis E. Hamilton [mailto:orc...@apache.org] 
Sent: Sunday, August 26, 2012 12:12
To: gene...@incubator.apache.org
Subject: RE: [VOTE] Apache OpenOffice Community Graduation Vote

Since my post was mentioned later on this thread, I thought I would summarize 
what I have as the take-away from intervening discussion.  I have no intention 
to deal with the use of language (i.e., semantics of "convenience") and the way 
that tacit policy understanding is conveyed among Apache project participants.

I will also refrain from any further additions to this topic.

TAKE-AWAYS

With regard to the production and delivery to users of authentic Apache 
OpenOffice binary builds, there seem to be the following concerns (especially 
for, but not limited to, Windows and Apple binaries and aggravated further by 
the restraints that are growing around evolving "App Store" requirements for 
consumer- and cloud-oriented platforms).  I see three cases:

   1. Authentication of binaries
   2. Provenance of bundled binary dependencies 
   3. Availability of source for inspection, audit, and provenance

 1. AUTHENTICATION OF BINARIES

The desire for binaries to be signed using digital signatures with private keys 
held by the ASF is a natural concern for authentication of a variety of 
binaries produced by Apache projects.

There appears to be agreement that any such signature introductions must be 
done by ASF-authorized agents.  The conclusion is that infrastructure would 
perform such signings.  These signings, by virtue of their modification of the 
unsigned binary, will invalidate any external signatures that were prepared as 
part of the release process.  (It is possible to extract the internal signature 
and verify an external signature, if that is ever any question about that.)

The signing party would have the reliance of the release-manager external 
signatures and other attestation that the binary is produced from the release 
sources.

This still leaves open additional concerns about the conditions under which the 
binaries are produced and any difficulties that result.

An alternative is for the signing authority to also produce the binaries, using 
the release sources directly on secured build machines.  There are a number of 
technical problems that arise in this case, unless the release candidates were 
built in the same manner but not (yet) signed.  That could work.  It would also 
confirm that the binaries are indeed produced from the release's sources using 
the parameters for the platform presumably also included in the source 
materials.

The remaining question is, what is being attested to by the production of 
binaries that are authenticated in this manner? Simply that they have been 
built in this manner and that it was done using ASF infrastructure, the 
integrity of which the ASF can be accountable for.  It is not an attestation 
that there are no bugs, no security defects, or even that the IP provenance is 
assured to be clean.  It is that the binary was produced under these particular 
verifiable conditions from the source materials provided as part of the source 
release along with dependencies on binaries incorporated in the build.  

It also provides a strong differentiator for binaries, however they might be 
identified, including even release candidates and developer builds, that were 
not provided in this manner.

2. PROVENANCE OF BUNDLED BINARY DEPENDENCIES

A complication in (1) is the incorporation of binary resources on which the 
source-code release depends in order to be built.  These might be authorized 
(and usually authenticated) redistributables having closed-source origins.  
These might be authorized open-source libraries that must be used without 
construction from sources in order for authentication of the dependency to be 
preserved.  (E.g., there are security libraries that have NIST certification on 
the binary library, never the source, and the certification is also sustained 
only when the library is used with specific tooling.)

For whatever reason, it is appropriate and preferable that the binary form of a 
dependency be relied upon, whether a jar file, a static library, or a dynamic 
library (DLL or SO) that becomes incorporated in the authenticated binary.

The specific dependencies of such a nature would need to be accounted for as 
part of the a

RE: [DISCUSS] Proposed PMC Chair nomination process

@sebb

Yes, what you say about the position of the Chair (and also how the chair 
accomplishes that as an officer of the ASF) was what I had in mind.

With regard to the PPMC, here is a roster of the *current* PPMC (subject to 
corrections anyone notices):

Kai Ahrens : kahrens PPMC
Florent André : florent PPMC
Dave Barton : bmcs PPMC
Mathias Bauer : mbauer PPMC
Cyril Beaussier : bidouille PPMC
Stephan Bergmann : sb PPMC
Raphael Bircher : rbircher PPMC
Simon Brouwer : simonbr PPMC
Arthur Buijs : artietee PPMC
Jin Hua Chen : chenjinh PPMC
Jian Hong Cheng : chengjh PPMC
Ariel Constenla-Haile : arielch PPMC
Yuri Dario : ydario PPMC
Hagar Delest : hagar PPMC
Herbert Dürr : hdu PPMC
Claudio Filho : filhocf PPMC
Andre Fischer : af PPMC
David Fisher : wave PPMC
Thomas J. Frazier : tj PPMC
Roberto Galoppini : galoppini PPMC
Pedro Giffuni : pfg PPMC
Wolf Halton : wolfhalton PPMC
Dennis E. Hamilton : orcmid PPMC
Don Harbison : dpharbison PPMC
Regina Henschel : regina PPMC
Ivo Hinkelmann : ivo PPMC
Kazunari Hirano : khirano PPMC
Martin Hollmichel : mhollmichel PPMC
Jim Jagielski : jim PPMC
Drew Jensen : atjensen PPMC
Christoph Jopp : cjopp PPMC
Damjan Jovanovic : damjan PPMC
Peter Junge : pj PPMC
Yegor Kozlov : yegor PPMC
Marcus Lange : marcus PPMC
Graham Lauder : yo PPMC
Armin Le Grand : alg PPMC
Steve Lee : stevelee PPMC
Wang Lei : leiw PPMC
Christian Lippka : clippka PPMC
Ian Lynch : ingotian PPMC
Yong Lin Ma : mayongl PPMC
Carl Marcum : cmarcum PPMC
David McKay : thegurkha PPMC
Ingrid von der Mehden : ingrid PPMC
Antón Méixome : meixome PPMC
Maho Nakata : maho PPMC
Albino  Neto : bino28 PPMC
Andrea Pescetti : pescetti PPMC
Frank Thomas Peters : fpe PPMC
Allen Pulsifer : apulsifer PPMC
Eike Rathke : erack PPMC
Manfred Reiter : fredao PPMC
Zoltán Reizinger : r4zoli PPMC
RGB.ES : rgb-es PPMC
Phillip Rhodes : prhodes PPMC
Andrew Rist : arist PPMC
Lawrence Rosen : lrosen PPMC
Roberto Salomon : salomon PPMC
Juan C. Sanz : jucasaca PPMC
Kay Schenk : kschenk PPMC
Jürgen Schmidt : jsc PPMC
Yang Shih-Ching : imacat PPMC
Jomar Silva : homembit PPMC
Kai Sommerfeld : kso PPMC
Louis Suárez-Potts : louis PPMC
Stefan Taxhet : st PPMC
Malte Timmermann : malte PPMC
Zhe Wang : wangzcdl PPMC
Rob Weir : robweir PPMC
Oliver-Rainer Wittmann : orw PPMC
Jian Fang Zhang : zhangjf PPMC
Xia Zhao : lilyzhao PPMC

-Original Message-
From: sebb [mailto:seb...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2012 12:17
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org; dennis.hamil...@acm.org
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Proposed PMC Chair nomination process

On 23 August 2012 19:22, Dennis E. Hamilton  wrote:
> I suggest that the initial Project Management Committee (PMC) needs to be 
> identified before the election of a Chair from that body is undertaken.

The initial proposed PMC for other podlings has usually been taken
from the PPMC membership, but dropping any inactive (or unwilling)
members.

> Also, this seems like a very good time to review, for the benefit of all 
> here, what the duties of PMC members are and, with respect to that, what the 
> specific responsibilities of the Chair are and what the special standing of 
> the Chair is so its accountability can be carried out.

http://www.apache.org/foundation/how-it-works.html#pmc-members
http://www.apache.org/dev/pmc.html
http://www.apache.org/dev/pmc.html#chair

The PMC chair is a position of responsibility (to the PMC and Board)
rather than authority over the PMC.

>  - Dennis
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Rob Weir [mailto:robw...@apache.org]
> Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2012 10:36
> To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: [DISCUSS] Proposed PMC Chair nomination process
>
> Now that the community graduation ballot has passed, one of our next
> tasks is to identify a PMC Chair.
>
> You can read about the duties of a PMC Chair here:
> http://www.apache.org/dev/pmc.html#chair
>
> How do we want to do this?
>
> A strawman proposal:
>
> 1) Nominations would be open for 72 hours.  Anyone can nominate
> someone for the role.  Self-nominations are fine.  And of course
> nominations can be declined.
>
> 2) If there is only one nomination, then we are done, provided there
> are no sustained objections.
>
> 3) If there is more than one nomination we discuss on the list for
> another 72 hours.  Discussion would primarily be on ooo-dev, but some
> subjects might be directed to ooo-private.
>
> 4) If after 72-hours discussion there are still two or more nominees
> then we vote.  Everyone would be welcome to vote, but binding votes
> would be from PPMC members.  If there are more than 2 candi

RE: [DISCUSS] Proposed PMC Chair nomination process

I'm going over my daily quota on this thread.  One clarification and then no 
more for today:

I never suggested that the *proposed* PMC be the body that recommends the 
chair.  The only body here that deals with personnel matters and other matters 
requiring binding votes on the project is the PPMC.  

There is no PPMC chair.  There is to be a PMC and a PMC Chair as part of 
creating the TLP.  Those are offered up by recommendation from the PPMC (with 
the concurrence of the Incubator PMC, one presumes).

I agree that this should be done as transparently as possible, even though 
ultimately the PPMC is responsible (with regard to the recommendation to the 
Board).

 - Dennis

-Original Message-
From: Dave Fisher [mailto:dave2w...@comcast.net] 
Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2012 11:47
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Proposed PMC Chair nomination process


On Aug 23, 2012, at 11:35 AM, Rob Weir wrote:

> On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 2:33 PM, Dave Fisher  wrote:
>> I'm not comfortable having a PMC Chair election and nomination on ooo-dev.
>> 
> 
> It appears the IPMC was able to do this for their own Chair.

Well they were able to reach consensus, but this was after a very, very long 
set of discussions that backed into selecting a new Chair. The discussion was 
not initially about the Chair.

> 
>> I also agree that we should form the PMC membership first.
>> 
> 
> See  my response to Dennis on  this.  There is no PMC here, only a PPMC.

Certainly and already replied. Maybe we should just call it the once and future 
PMC and stop having a silly semantic argument.

I've written what I want to say about this today and will now go back to work.

Regards,
Dave

> 
>> Regards,
>> Dave
>> 
>> On Aug 23, 2012, at 11:22 AM, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
>> 
>>> I suggest that the initial Project Management Committee (PMC) needs to be 
>>> identified before the election of a Chair from that body is undertaken.
>>> 
>>> Also, this seems like a very good time to review, for the benefit of all 
>>> here, what the duties of PMC members are and, with respect to that, what 
>>> the specific responsibilities of the Chair are and what the special 
>>> standing of the Chair is so its accountability can be carried out.
>>> 
>>> - Dennis
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: Rob Weir [mailto:robw...@apache.org]
>>> Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2012 10:36
>>> To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>> Subject: [DISCUSS] Proposed PMC Chair nomination process
>>> 
>>> Now that the community graduation ballot has passed, one of our next
>>> tasks is to identify a PMC Chair.
>>> 
>>> You can read about the duties of a PMC Chair here:
>>> http://www.apache.org/dev/pmc.html#chair
>>> 
>>> How do we want to do this?
>>> 
>>> A strawman proposal:
>>> 
>>> 1) Nominations would be open for 72 hours.  Anyone can nominate
>>> someone for the role.  Self-nominations are fine.  And of course
>>> nominations can be declined.
>>> 
>>> 2) If there is only one nomination, then we are done, provided there
>>> are no sustained objections.
>>> 
>>> 3) If there is more than one nomination we discuss on the list for
>>> another 72 hours.  Discussion would primarily be on ooo-dev, but some
>>> subjects might be directed to ooo-private.
>>> 
>>> 4) If after 72-hours discussion there are still two or more nominees
>>> then we vote.  Everyone would be welcome to vote, but binding votes
>>> would be from PPMC members.  If there are more than 2 candidates we
>>> would probably need to use a more complicated voting system, or have a
>>> run-off vote if none of the nominees receive an outright majority.
>>> 
>>> Any improvements or alternatives to this basic scheme?
>>> 
>>> Regards,
>>> 
>>> -Rob
>>> 
>>

RE: [DISCUSS] Proposed PMC Chair nomination process

Funny.

I imagine that if the Board were to take any surprising action, it would be by 
declining the request for approval of the TLP, along with recommendations for 
any cure.

In any case, the board can veto anything, whether done in the open or not, 
whether the list of PMC is agreed or not.  I suggest the idea is always for us 
to govern ourselves as a community, to respect the ASF policies and principles, 
and to respond to actions and instructions from the board however they come 
about.

Having a public understanding of the proposed PMC membership followed then the 
designation of a Chair seems completely appropriate, despite the possibility of 
lightning bolts from on high.  

If there is to be determination of the recommended Chair by lazy consensus (and 
voting if necessary), should not the recommendation for the PMC also be brought 
forward for concurrence on ooo-dev?

 - Dennis

-Original Message-
From: Rob Weir [mailto:robw...@apache.org] 
Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2012 11:30
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Proposed PMC Chair nomination process

On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 2:22 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton
 wrote:
> I suggest that the initial Project Management Committee (PMC) needs to be 
> identified before the election of a Chair from that body is undertaken.
>

There is a bootstrapping issue with that suggestion.  The PMC does not
exist until the ASF Board creates it.  And the Board has veto power
over that list.  So all we have at this time, formally at least, is
the PPMC.

> Also, this seems like a very good time to review, for the benefit of all 
> here, what the duties of PMC members are and, with respect to that, what the 
> specific responsibilities of the Chair are and what the special standing of 
> the Chair is so its accountability can be carried out.
>

Indeed.  That is why my 2nd sentence was to point to a link that
describes exactly this.

-Rob

>  - Dennis
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Rob Weir [mailto:robw...@apache.org]
> Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2012 10:36
> To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: [DISCUSS] Proposed PMC Chair nomination process
>
> Now that the community graduation ballot has passed, one of our next
> tasks is to identify a PMC Chair.
>
> You can read about the duties of a PMC Chair here:
> http://www.apache.org/dev/pmc.html#chair
>
> How do we want to do this?
>
> A strawman proposal:
>
> 1) Nominations would be open for 72 hours.  Anyone can nominate
> someone for the role.  Self-nominations are fine.  And of course
> nominations can be declined.
>
> 2) If there is only one nomination, then we are done, provided there
> are no sustained objections.
>
> 3) If there is more than one nomination we discuss on the list for
> another 72 hours.  Discussion would primarily be on ooo-dev, but some
> subjects might be directed to ooo-private.
>
> 4) If after 72-hours discussion there are still two or more nominees
> then we vote.  Everyone would be welcome to vote, but binding votes
> would be from PPMC members.  If there are more than 2 candidates we
> would probably need to use a more complicated voting system, or have a
> run-off vote if none of the nominees receive an outright majority.
>
> Any improvements or alternatives to this basic scheme?
>
> Regards,
>
> -Rob
>

RE: [DISCUSS] Proposed PMC Chair nomination process