incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rob Weir <>
Subject Re: Teams and Leads
Date Thu, 16 Jun 2011 14:39:01 GMT
It might be worth describing how national language projects and the
OpenOffce NLC has worked in the past.  I think this would be
educational for our Apache mentors to understand a little of what they
do.  It is much more than just translation.  They are almost more like
affiliate organizations that promote OpenOffice in their countries.,
They are the "face of OOo" in their respective countries.  But you
could explain it better than me.

A top level question for is is how we see this mapping to the Apache
project.  The two extremes are:

1) Move all of this into the Apache project.  All 100+ translation
projects, country marketing projects, etc.

2) Have the national language projects run outside of Apache.  Since
anyone can modify the code we released and repackage it and distribute
it, it should be possible for any party to independently add
translations and even rename it for distribution in their country.  Of
course, while respecting the license and trademark requirements.

Of course, we can do some intermediate thing to.  For example, it
might work well to have volunteers who produce material that is
directly included in a release, such as translations, localization
patches, product help files, etc., be part of the Apache project.  But
then there would be freedom for external groups to continue
distributing, marketing, etc., localized versions outside of the
Apache project.

One way to look at this is what your actual experience has been with
this in OpenOffice before, in terms of patterns of collaboration and
interaction.  For example, is there often peer-to-peer coordination
required between the German and the Spanish language projects?  Or is
it more of a hub-and-spokes model where the language "teams" are
semi-autonomous, but coordinate with the main OOo project, receiving
releases and submitting patches, etc.?

I'd be interested in hearing arguments either way.


On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 10:18 AM, Manfred A. Reiter <> wrote:
> 2011/6/16 Rob Weir <>:
>> On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 9:27 AM, RA Stehmann
>> <> wrote:
>>> I think we shouldn't invent the wheel twice ;-).
>>> The community has an more or less good working
>>> infrastructure of leads, contact persons, native lang communities,
>>> teams, mailing lists, websites etc..
>>> IMO we should make an inventory, keep the usefull elements and drop the
>>> dated. And let persons, who undertake the task of doing something and
>>> who are elected by the community, doing their job forward.
>> That makes sense to me.  But I think this is less about "wearing
>> crowns" and more about "doing".  We don't need to give someone the
>> title of "X Lead".  But if someone steps up and starts doing X, and
>> does it well, works well in the project, and ensure that decisions
>> occur via consensus on the list, than that person will start taking on
>> the attributes of the de facto "X Lead".
>> We have a request entered with Apache Infrastructure for a wiki to
>> help us with your second point.  Once we have the wiki it should be
>> possible to map out a inventory or "site map" of the existing
>> web site.   So maybe a big table listing each of the
>> subsites or services on, along with columns for
>> "migrate/archive/trash", "priority" and "volunteer".  Something like
>> that.
> to have an idea ... these are the current mailinglists
> in the OOo ... german subdomain.
> at the beginning the geramanophone branche of OOo startet with only
> *two* mailinglist
> all the others where created according to the needs of the German Project.
> I don't know how ot organise the national parts of the project.
> Subdomains?
> But IMHO each "national project" should start with at least a userlist
> and a list to organise the "national needs" ;-)
> ... Ingrid ... Christian other ideas?
> Manfred
> excuse typos, grammer and diction

View raw message