Hello there, > > >> > > > > > > Can you tell me where does this come from? Where this decision > > > has been discussed and taken and by whom? The fact that we don't > > > use the OOo site is to satisfy a request that has nothing to do > > > with quality. > > > > > > We are an open source project, why should we prevent somebody to > > > contribute for whatever reason? what are the criteria for the > > > quality you're talking about, where are they written, who is the > > > person giving the approval? That would be funny that people could > > > contribute to OOo but not to LibO... > > > > > > > It is a work in progress. We will be consulting with all of the > > stakeholders once things settle down and LibO3.3 has been released. > > Rest assured we will be able to change things once a community > > consensus has been reached. > > > > We did not want to move focus away from the important areas of > > community development at the moment. Hence the comment previously. > > > > Stay tuned
I must say that I'm left perplexed by all this. Michael, would you mind telling us: - who is "We" as "we did not want to move focus away" - why this secrecy? Do you remember it's an open source project? - "we will be consulting with all of the stakeholders... " so let me rephrase: you're doing something apparently in secret then will battle hard to defend it in front of the community? That's about the most unproductive thing I can think of here, and it reminds me of the Drupal misunderstanding. Nobody has ever talked about an extension store/website, although it's definitely something we need to address. But working this way around just does not help. -- Charles-H. Schulz Membre du Comité exécutif The Document Foundation. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [email protected] List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/website/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
