From ooo-dev-return-4753-apmail-incubator-ooo-dev-archive=incubator.apache.org@incubator.apache.org Fri Sep 2 12:17:42 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-incubator-ooo-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-ooo-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 3D0CC794E for ; Fri, 2 Sep 2011 12:17:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 54837 invoked by uid 500); 2 Sep 2011 12:17:41 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-ooo-dev-archive@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 54740 invoked by uid 500); 2 Sep 2011 12:17:40 -0000 Mailing-List: contact ooo-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 54732 invoked by uid 99); 2 Sep 2011 12:17:38 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 02 Sep 2011 12:17:38 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=5.0 tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of marcus.mail@wtnet.de designates 213.209.103.13 as permitted sender) Received: from [213.209.103.13] (HELO smtp3.wtnet.de) (213.209.103.13) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 02 Sep 2011 12:17:30 +0000 X-WT-Originating-IP: 84.46.106.252 Received: from f9.linux (pop8-761.catv.wtnet.de [84.46.106.252]) (authenticated bits=0) by smtp3.wtnet.de (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p82CH8H7007312 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Fri, 2 Sep 2011 14:17:08 +0200 Message-ID: <4E60C944.6060408@wtnet.de> Date: Fri, 02 Sep 2011 14:17:08 +0200 From: "Marcus (OOo)" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686 (x86_64); de; rv:1.9.2.20) Gecko/20110804 Thunderbird/3.1.12 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org Subject: Re: Set up of ooo-ja-general@incubator.apache.org References: <671317C7-8EA2-4212-A95F-8DCB45120D28@free.fr> <4E609CDB.1050407@wtnet.de> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org Am 09/02/2011 02:01 PM, schrieb Rob Weir: > On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 5:07 AM, Marcus (OOo) wrote: >> Am 09/02/2011 10:10 AM, schrieb Kazunari Hirano: >>> >>> Hi eric, >>> >>> On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 4:58 PM, eric b wrote: >>>> >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> >>>> -1 from me, for the following reasons : >>>> >>>> - we should define something general, for all the locales in the same >>>> time, >>>> but not one and another one .. and so on. >> >> I also would like to see some agreements what and how to do it. >> To prevent to process single puzzle pieces again and again. >> >>>> - no precipitation is better : not everybody understood how to create and >>>> even propose a new project, re replace the existing NLC one. >>>> - how does this work ? K. Hirano asks, and will manage everything alone ? >>> >>> No. I can not do it alone. We will discuss how to manage things on >>> the list with Japanese users and contributors. >>> I don't propose creation of a native language project. >> >> It should be known that there are already some people that will manage the >> list; like for the ooo-users@ list. >> >>> I am proposing creation of a list where Japanese AOOo users and AOOo >>> developers and AOOo contributors can understand Apache OpenOffice.org >>> project and discuss how to make AOOo the product and community better >>> "in Japanese" to involve Japanese users and contributors who don't >>> read English. >> >> Furthermore we should talk about a common structure how to name the lists >> befor we have different names for different NLC groups. To prevent >> uncontrolled growth regarding names. >> >> To stick with a known naming I would prefer ooo-users-ja@. Or maybe >> ooo-discuss-ja@ when you already know that many discussions will come about >> the Japanese way of AOO. >> >> Please don't get me wrong but "general" looks like that the content is not >> yet known what will be posted in the list. ;-) >> > > Actually, the convention at Apache is to have "general" lists for > projects. Remember, all lists are used for discussions. The name of > the list expresses either 1) Who is doing the discussing (dev, users, > etc.), or 2) The topic of the discussion (private, support, etc.) > There is no need to put the name "discuss" in the list name. > "General" would be for discussions that are not specific to any other > project list. So discussions of general interest. Interesting to know. However, "general" doesn't tell me anything and *personally* I would avoid it. > > I know this is different than how OOo did it. Yes, maybe thats the reason. Marcus