Mailing-List: contact ooo-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of dave2wave@comcast.net
 designates 76.96.27.243 as permitted sender)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084)
Subject: Re: Native Language vs l10n
From: Dave Fisher <dave2wave@comcast.net>
In-Reply-To: <4DFBB8E0.8050203@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2011 14:15:34 -0700
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <DDAF5F48-6C3E-4000-9146-0CFCC506AA8F@comcast.net>
References: <000AAA54-844A-431C-99AC-208300112CBF@gmail.com>
	<229831.65872.qm@web161421.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>	<4DFBA333.1090102@gmail.com>
 <BANLkTinL3MiZg_GcH6Ch6+V1fZAyuimThg@mail.gmail.com>
 <4DFBB8E0.8050203@gmail.com>
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org


On Jun 17, 2011, at 1:28 PM, Manfred A. Reiter wrote:

> Dear Rob,
>=20
> Am 17.06.2011 21:49, schrieb Rob Weir:
>> On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 2:55 PM, Manfred A. =
Reiter<ma.reiter@gmail.com>wrote:
>>> Can you understand, that due to the nature of OOo it always
>>> had very strong language specific communities, wich significantly
>>> contributed to the huge success of OOo?
>>>=20
>>> Interfering with the habits and cultures established within these
>>> communties will in fact not take you any further than somebody
>>> can say "we obeyed the Apache standard rules".
>>>=20
>>> The power of local communites which can act independently,
>>> has proven to be especially usefull in these areas were competing
>>> products simply couldn't offer a "consumer focused" localised =
solution.
>>>=20
>>> I'm just worried that you will alienate some very active =
contributors
>>> by enforcing PMC rules just ... "because ..."
>>>=20
>> For things that impact the product release, things like code =
contributions,
>> documentation, translations, etc., things that actually could make =
the bits
>> and bytes of the release different, I think it is very important that =
these
>> pieces are done in Apache.  And by being in the Apache project, they =
are
>> covered by the Apache 2.0 license and by our consensus decision =
making
>> process.
> never questioned that.
>=20
> IF a spelling mistake and a correction of the same in <Klingon - or =
your favorite language> is actually core development, that needs to be =
covered by a full blown PMC
> then you probably need a round of refactoring in the core ;-).
>=20
>> For the activities that do not impact the actual contents of the =
release,
>> things like user support, country- or language-specific marketing =
activities
>> and so on, for these I could see other models working as well.
>=20
> you got it!
>=20
>> Remember,
>> with any Apache project, anyone is free to take the project's source =
code,
>> translate it, build it and market it or even sell it.  This could be =
done
>> with modifications and enhancements.  This is all possible under the =
Apache
>> 2.0 license, whether you participate in the project or not.
>>=20
> ack
>> So if there are existing groups that do such activities under =
Sun/Oracle
>> OpenOffice.org, then they can continue to do so, by using Apache =
OpenOffice.
>> But when we start talking about the Apache project, then we are not =
talking
>> about "groups" joining.  We're talking about individuals joining.
> got that during last discussions ;-)
>=20
>>  I don't
>> think we want to have independent, autonomous groups within an Apache
>> project.
>>=20
> neither do I
>=20
>> But I wonder whether one solution is this:
>>=20
>> 1) Strong existing language projects continue to operate =
independently,
>> according to their own rules.
> exactly my point
>=20
>> 2) They ensure that their work is all done under Apache 2.0 license =
so it is
>> usable by Apache OpenOffice as well as by LibreOffice
>>=20
>> 3) Language projects each appoint at least one member to join the =
Apache
>> OpenOffice project as a liaison.

(deleting 3 drafts to earlier messages in this thread.)

I like Rob's very direct 3 points. I would edit the language slightly.

Strike the words "Strong existing" from 1) - the language project should =
not need to think about how strong they are - strong has differing =
cultural interpretations.

For 3) "as a liaison" ought to be dropped. Everyone joins as an =
individual. Many of us might consider that we came here as liaisons, but =
that is not always the case.

Language projects
- continue to operate independently according to their own rules.
- ensure their work is done under the Apache 2.0 license so that it is =
usable by Apache OpenOffice as well as LibreOffice.
- appoint at least one member to join the Apache OpenOffice project.

There are a couple of implicit "musts" on 1 or 2 that might be =
culturally insensitive... This needs to be a well nuanced message IIRC =
Sally Khudairi's marketing 101 from Apachecon. Mentors - should we get =
Sally involved in the nuance, or not?

The language needs to be as healing as possible. Language projects =
shouldn't feel abandoned either. I'm feeling like I'm working here for a =
second: =
http://gawker.com/5812622/working-at-the-apple-store-tales-from-the-inside=


:-)

+1 if the message is spun up and nuanced.

There are more pieces to an announcement, I think we owe the community =
some message by late next week.

> that could do the trick ...
>=20
> but I would avoid to force grown and working communities
> under a gonvernance process they don't need.
>=20
> I would also avoid to deny those language projects to be
> seperated from Apache.org ... in other words /home should
> be at lang-klingon.ooo.apache.org and not oooinklingon.org
> that will cause confusion, and is not very smart marketingwise.

On the project website we can keep a roster of known Language projects =
with a registration form.

Happy Friday everyone :-)

Best Regards,
Dave

>=20


>=20
>=20
> cheers
>=20
> Manfred