incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ian Lynch <>
Subject Re: Refactoring the brand: Apache ooo + (was branding)
Date Wed, 03 Aug 2011 14:25:36 GMT
On 3 August 2011 15:10, Rob Weir <> wrote:

> On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 9:54 AM, Andre Schnabel <>
> wrote:
> > Hi Rob,
> >
> >> Von: Rob Weir <>
> >
> >> >
> >> > I think there is a difference between informed hypothesis and
> >> speculation
> >> > :-)
> >>
> >> And neither is the same as facts.  I'm concerned when I hear
> >> paternalistic statements of "our contributors will never post patches"
> >> or "They would never ever sign the iCLA", or "If we don't let them
> >> contribute anonymously with 1-character passwords and fake names under
> >> an eclectic license of their choice then they will kill themselves".
> >
> > Well maybe - just maybe - you may consider that the people who try to
> give
> > you some advice have been dealing with exactly those type of contributors
> > for the last couple of years, while IBM (according to your own words
> > was not the best citizen in the Ooo community ecosystem).
> >
> I do consider that.  I'm sure their views are honestly held.  I'm not
> ignoring them.   But there is a huge difference between an opinion on
> what you personally would prefer or do versus an opinion on what you
> think thousands of others would prefer or do.  I can accept the former
> while giving much less weight to the latter. I see no reason to accept
> as the gospel truth the views of 3 people claiming to speak for
> thousands when we have the easy ability to reach out to the thousands
> directly.
> > Btw. I have mot seen anybody stating such statements as you quote. The
> only
> > thing i saw was people pointing to risks. You may ignore a certain amount
> > of risks, but finally these sum up.
> >
> There are risk either way.  For example, the risk of having a wiki
> containing product documentation that no one can copy or modify
> because it is not under a proper license.
> > You need not care about me (I'm not an apache committer) but it's sad
> that
> > you even try to ignore those people who are strongly committed to OOo at
> > apache.
> >
> Generally, it is in bad form to start every conversation with a
> statement along the lines of, "You probably will ignore me" or "You
> may not care what I say" or "You'll probably will think this is a bad
> idea", etc.  Have enough respect for your own ideas that you think
> they are worthy of serious consideration.  And have enough respect for
> others on the list that you assume that they will consider your
> thoughts serious.  It poisons the conversation from the start when you
> start in a defensive tone.

To be fair, an overly aggressive tone can do just as much poisoning as a
defensive one. I think it is also worth bearing in mind that a lot of people
here are not native English speakers and so it is easy to read things into
posts that were either not intended or were a subset of the entire situation
simply because it just takes too long to type reams in a foreign language
explaining every aspect of everything. Apart from the language issue, what
is considered bad form varies with culture so we should be wary of brute
logic from our own perspective as a tool for progress. We have to work
together and respect other people's position especially when most are doing
this for love rather than for money. It's not like in a company where you
can sack and replace people. We have lost good people in the past because
that wasn't understood and it's easier to keep people and their knowledge
resource than replace and retrain them.

> -Rob
> >
> > regards,
> >
> > André
> >
> > PS: again a scnr:
> >
> >
> >

Ofqual Accredited IT Qualifications (The Schools ITQ) +44 (0)1827 305940

The Learning Machine Limited, Reg Office, 36 Ashby Road, Tamworth,
Staffordshire, B79 8AQ. Reg No: 05560797, Registered in England and

  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message