incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rob Weir <robw...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Status of existing OOo user guides
Date Tue, 06 Sep 2011 12:29:25 GMT
On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 7:18 AM, Jean Weber <jeanweber@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 5, 2011 at 23:02, Rob Weir <robweir@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>> Wearing my IBM hat, the larger issue, one that may not concern
>> everyone here but does concern me, is the impact the license choice
>> has on our ability to attract corporate-sponsored contributors to an
>> effort that is not using a compatible license,  By analogy to the
>> project source code,under Apache 2.0, it is very easy for IBM
>> developers to contribute patches, etc., to that code.  We contribute
>> and know that we improve the product as well as preserve our ability
>> to bring that code, with our fixes and other's fixes as well, and
>> include that in Symphony releases.  Once we start mixing copyleft
>> components into the mix, even documentation components, we make it
>> much more difficult for risk-averse corporations to contribute.
>>
>> So this is a matter of "help me help you".  If we can move to a
>> permissive/compatible license for future documentation work, then I
>> can seek contributions of Symphony-related documentations, quick
>> starts, as well help with existing doc.  (In fact I've already started
>> that discussion internally at IBM, with favorable feedback).  Having a
>> compatible license helps align our interests.
>>
>
> Given the lack of interest so far at ODFAuthors, I'm now thinking that

Wow, that was a fast week!

I'm signed up on the ODF Authors mailing list, and I've seen very
little.  Last week was a vacation week for many in the US.  School
starts today for many.  I don't know if that is a factor.

You mentioned the Apache-Extras UI being not very user-friendly.  I
wasn't think of sending users to that page.  I was thinking of using
that mainly as a host for load/bandwidth reasons.  We would still need
a user-friendly page, or set of pages, at ODFAuthors or at AOOo to
link to the documentation content.  Deep-linking should be fine.

> not attempting to reuse the existing user guides may be the way to go.
> Start over with Symphony-related docs, using a new team of techwriters
> (with IBM-sponsored people as the core) and just get on with it. Save
> a lot of hassle.
>

Something to remember is that Symphony is only the three main apps.
It does not cover, for example, Base.  So even if we did switch to
Symphony docs for the core, we'd still need to find a way to cover the
other pieces.

> I'm fairly sure that whatever route AOOo chooses to take, I won't be
> interested in being part of it. I had no real idea of what would be
> involved here (I suspect few of us did) and now realise that it's
> probably just not my thing.
>

I'm not really seeing how the move to AOOo makes it any different from
ODFAuthors.  You were a separate group before, and you remain so
today. Remaining independent is a fine choice.  Working within the
project is fine as well, but then we need to resolve the license
issues.

Regards

-Rob

> --Jean
>

Mime
View raw message