incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ian Lynch <ianrly...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Not new but under a new hat
Date Thu, 29 Sep 2011 07:56:11 GMT
On 28 September 2011 16:51, Rob Weir <robweir@apache.org> wrote:

> On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 11:30 AM, Ian Lynch <ianrlynch@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> If TDF wants to take the AOOo source code and build it, with or
> >> without enhancements, and release it under the name "LibreOffice" for
> >> use with Linux distros, then they are welcome to do that.  They need
> >> no additional permissions from Apache or this project.
> >
> >
> > But that isn't really the point. The point is to look for ways we can
> talk
> > on an even footing for the good of both projects not say things as if it
> is
> > a them and us confrontation. Makes one realise why diplomats have a
> > different skill set to technocrats ;-)
> >
>
> You are welcome to apply your energy in any way you wish.  So am I.  I
> wish us both luck.
>

I'll race you to the first $10 million  ;-)

>
> > In any case, I think we should avoid treating LO or AOOo as a unified
> >> mass of opinion, where every participant in each project thinks
> >> identically and agrees.
> >
> >
> > That doesn't happen in any political organisation. But political
> > organisations do look for consensus in key areas that are for the benefit
> of
> > both. Look at the current UK government and I'd hope that LibO AOO were
> > politically closer than those two ;-)
> >
> >>
> >> Things are different now.  Now they have an alternative in AOOo.
> >
> >
> > This is simply assuming that the competitive option is better than a
> > cooperative one. In some circumstances that is so, in these circumstances
> I
> > think it will simply make inefficient use of resources.  However, I see
> > little chance of reconciling this while the dominant voices seem so keen
> to
> > rub each other up the wrong way.
> >
>
> Since this is not Soviet Russia,


Similar reference to Microsoft when discuss in FOSS in the early days. If
you take this view why do you participate in any open source community? Most
companies form strategic alliances and plan, so cooperative work and
associated planning is common in the private sector. As I said, I'll race
you to the first $10 million.

If everyone agreed that having a single project was best today, then
> we would have a single project tomorrow.


Point is we have made little real effort to achieve any consensus on this.
We have done a lot of bitching on both sides and posted stuff like this that
almost guarantees it will never happen.


>  The question should be what
> can you, or I, or anyone else who wants that outcome, do today, to
> make it more likely to move closer to that outcome.
>

I'd say stop posting reactionary and emotive stuff when someone makes a
positive suggestion to get people working together.

>
> > We
> >> should continue to move forward with our vision.  As our project and
> >> community develops and we get closer to a solid release, the power of
> >> an open, meritocratic development process at Apache will be more
> >> evident.  The volunteer who easily moved from OOo to LO will easily
> >> move to AOOo once we show ourselves to have progress, vitality,
> >> encouragement and fun.
> >
> >
> > So your strategy is we are superior, they will see the light and convert?
> > Sounds to me like a religious experience :-)
> >
>
> I believe in free choice religiously, yes.  And I believe in Apache as
> well.  If I believed in neither then I would have supported TDF/LO
> from the start


So the world is black or white, polarised into two binary extremes? I hardly
think so.  I believe there are plenty of people who consider themselves part
of both OOo and LibO communities and do not see any real problem with that.
I'm using LibO on Ubuntu here myself and I'm a committer at Apache.

>


> >  But we have a lot of work to get there.
> >
> >
> > Which would be a lot easier with rather than without cooperation and with
> > agreement on reasonable division of labour for development. Yes it will
> > happen anyway eventually but why make life more difficult than it needs
> to
> > be?
> >
>
> Do you have a concrete suggestion?
>

I already made it. Divide up the work in a sensible way that optimises the
resources across both projects. I don't expect that to happen simply by
saying it, it will require quite a lot of discussion and some compromises
but it is a long term goal worth achieving. There is a LibO conference in
Paris soon. That could be a starting point.

>
> >  But
> >> this is not a race to see who can reformat code indentation in 8
> >> million lines of code the fastest.   Honestly, the state of the
> >> community in 6 months is more critical than the state of the code in 6
> >> months.  The community is the platform we build the project on.
> >>
> >
> > Which seems completely antithetical to the rest of your post.
> >
>
> Only if you misunderstood almost everything I've said.
>

Probably as you seem not to have noticed I made a proposal.  Maybe we aren't
communicating effectively.  Of course I'd define community as the open
source community as well as Apache and TDF so I don't see the need or
benefit to entrench divisions between Apache and TDF when the common goals
are more important than micropolitics.

>
> --
Ian

Ofqual Accredited IT Qualifications (The Schools ITQ)

www.theINGOTs.org +44 (0)1827 305940

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

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