Mailing-List: contact general-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: general@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: neutral (nike.apache.org: local policy)
References: <00EDD8E7-3429-486E-8E1A-7FBA310A1408@webmink.com>
 <OFB8DCDD55.52205FC4-ON852578A4.0002933E-852578A4.0007DF77@lotus.com>
 <1307109931.13558.228.camel@lenovo-w500>
 <A0624B38-6F03-408C-8226-8E148C1D9F6A@jaguNET.com>
 <BANLkTinyEFZv=h3JWMmc4eBgFGBJEyoR9g@mail.gmail.com>
 <4DE8F924.4020605@apache.org>
 <09139A1C-38FD-4B64-9276-3F2BBF0DEE4E@jaguNET.com>
 <4DE9066F.6030300@apache.org>
 <6C55E2D5-BA4E-4D38-8BCA-02F268A749E2@jaguNET.com>
In-Reply-To: <6C55E2D5-BA4E-4D38-8BCA-02F268A749E2@jaguNET.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (iPhone Mail 8J2)
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=us-ascii
Message-Id: <EEBB9B2C-E851-4557-8954-37232257A9D2@apache.org>
Cc: "general@incubator.apache.org" <general@incubator.apache.org>
From: Ross Gardler <rgardler@apache.org>
Subject: Re: Proposal for OpenOffice Incubator strategy
Date: Fri, 3 Jun 2011 19:13:45 +0100
To: "general@incubator.apache.org" <general@incubator.apache.org>

Sent from my mobile device (so please excuse typos)

On 3 Jun 2011, at 17:15, Jim Jagielski <jim@jaguNET.com> wrote:

>=20
> On Jun 3, 2011, at 12:06 PM, Ross Gardler wrote:
>=20
>> On 03/06/2011 16:43, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>>>=20
>>> On Jun 3, 2011, at 11:09 AM, Ross Gardler wrote:
>>>>=20
>>>> Please see Simon Phipps' email earlier today that contained a very simi=
lar suggestion with some more detail, it would be nice to bring these two th=
reads together.
>>>>=20
>>>=20
>>> Simon's email, from what I can tell, boils down to:
>>>=20
>>>  1. The podling goes along as suggested.
>>>  2. The TDF continues business as usual.
>>=20
>>=20
>> I read it differently and more like what was proposed in this thread.
>>=20
>> The podling goes along as suggested and TDF continues to provide essentia=
l support to existing users of the the end user product that is currently ca=
lled OpenOffice.org to some and LibreOffice to others).
>>=20
>=20
> But what of the *development* of the code?

Ahhh... Yes I see something missing from Simons mail here. I assumed that th=
e LibreOffice distribution would gradually migrate to using the core compone=
nts proposed here (Apache ODFSuite as Simin called it) and thus collaboratio=
n on those components would also migrate here.=20

> If business-as-usual
> is both sides independently developing the codebase, then
> how does that address what is, I guess, a main issue?

It doesn't help if there are two code bases, but if one project focusses  on=
 building permissively licensed core components that are needed in productiv=
ity apps in general then collaboration can happen on those components.=20

LibreOffice can continue to build an LGPL office suite (using those core com=
ponents and their build infrastructure) and others can continue to build  th=
eir own end user products under whatever license they choose (which might in=
clude a permissively licences end user product here).=20

If I understand correctly the donations from Oracle are not going to enable u=
s to build an appropriately licenced end user product without significant wo=
rk. Furthermore, the proposal and various press releases seem to indicate th=
at A key focus of this project will be componentisation of the code base mak=
ing it easier to reuse.=20

> Is the
> idea that the ASF contribute code which is then consumed
> by TDF and that any patches to TDF remain unaccessible to
> the ASF? Does this result in the communities driving closer
> together or farther apart?

My hope is that the benefits of collaboration over maintaining a fork will b=
ring us closer together. I realise this means copyleft only folk have to com=
e towards us for this to work.  Certainly some people who don't like permiss=
ive licenses will never do this. I hope there are enough who see collaborati=
on as being the right option.=20

I may be being naive, I prefer to think I'm an optimist.=20


However, maybe your right. Maybe I'm trying to link two ideas that should be=
 kept separate so they can be evaluated separately.=20

Ross


> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>=20

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