Mailing-List: contact general-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: general@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of daniel.haischt@googlemail.com
 designates 209.85.161.175 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=googlemail.com; s=gamma;
        h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
         :content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
        b=Q8zX0KREpa3p1UzM08L5h5cLB7AHO70mn5i/IKuud+XaRp6RcilKV/QieDguaA9/y0
         U7VHiGVYTLvUn8tmzUiNDJHW853VdbVUJTgFltjFyFwNayOeo1sIfRJpJZLKwk0hNDQ8
         +IYtzJJ/BX2Gt14FOixdxrARrV5V76BuPoEkI=
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: 
 <OFD1FEAC44.8EB33732-ON852578A3.006EBDFC-852578A3.006F8DCF@lotus.com>
References: <20110602000137.GA60771@devsys.jaguNET.com>
	<4DE6D6E9.8080609@apache.org>
	<4DE76850.2060905@documentfoundation.org>
	<OFE3F371B9.569FF3A7-ON852578A3.004F1A01-852578A3.0050A3FE@lotus.com>
	<2D234AC2-791A-4BD9-9B71-B93610164604@jaguNET.com>
	<BANLkTinYcxdq83eqD68Lk_hUprk=8GJ0vA@mail.gmail.com>
	<OFE4596A2F.9528DCC8-ON852578A3.005E69E8-852578A3.00614564@lotus.com>
	<BANLkTikbhrShAsm9JhBUPhHt1CjvenJ98w@mail.gmail.com>
	<OFE629B23E.EE793096-ON852578A3.0066EAF1-852578A3.006B8F8B@lotus.com>
	<BANLkTikxiNjyRTyNkp2azS5wRbKDO-XePw@mail.gmail.com>
	<OFD1FEAC44.8EB33732-ON852578A3.006EBDFC-852578A3.006F8DCF@lotus.com>
Date: Thu, 2 Jun 2011 22:44:26 +0200
Message-ID: <BANLkTi=7w2G95bNv4VXzzn5oqpR9jD3HDA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Blondie's Parallel Lines...
From: dsh <daniel.haischt@googlemail.com>
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Rob,

IMHO "the project" is "on track" the community just needs to discuss
some more things and sort them out. It is just that I don't even think
it's required to provide proof-points based on "questionable"
analytics at this point in time. There is a saying in this regards "I
only believe in statistics that I doctored myself" and that's
certainly one reason why I feel suspicious about these kind of
analysis :)

Cheers
Daniel

On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 10:18 PM,  <robert_weir@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> dsh <daniel.haischt@googlemail.com> wrote on 06/02/2011 04:05:38 PM:
>
>>
>> IMHO you should not discuss or question the LO community size
>> respective its vitality in any way at this place. That's certainly not
>> the scope of the OpenOffice Apache incubation proposal anyway. The
>
> I disagree. =A0The question was raised on the list whether this project w=
as
> on track to have a sufficient number of developers to allow this project
> to thrive. =A0In my analysis I commented on two highly relevant comparabl=
e
> projects, estimating how many core developers they have. =A0IMHO, this is
> **highly** relevant.
>
> If you or anyone else would like to propose a different analysis leading
> to a different number, then I'd welcome as well.
>
> -Rob
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org