incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dave Fisher <dave2w...@comcast.net>
Subject Re: Areas for cooperation between AOOO and LO [was: Cooperation withRe: Neutral / shared security list ...]
Date Tue, 25 Oct 2011 15:28:26 GMT

On Oct 25, 2011, at 2:38 AM, Ian Lynch wrote:

> Seems to me that while the focus is political point scoring, aggression,
> sarcasm and such the chances of getting cooperation are zero.

+1. We will need to crawl to co-operation before we walk and run.

Regards,
Dave

> 
> On 25 October 2011 00:32, Rob Weir <robweir@apache.org> wrote:
> 
>> On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 7:11 PM, Simon Phipps <simon@webmink.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> On 25 Oct 2011, at 00:56, Rob Weir wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Hi Simon, do you have any other ideas for cooperation, preferably ones
>>>> that are not redundant?
>>> 
>>> While I am amused that your first words after "hopefully will attract
>> fewer trolls" themselves include a mean-spirited troll, I'm sorry you think
>> a collaborative security mailing list with shared, collaborative ownership
>> is "redundant".
>>> 
>> 
>> We already have a collaborative security mailing list that has 4 LO
>> members on it, as well as several AOOo members, representatives from
>> other vendors, security experts from Linux distros, etc.  So we are
>> already there.  Creating a new list for the same thing would be
>> redundant.
>> 
>>> We clearly have very different views of the world. I continue to think
>> such a list holds great opportunity for collaboration since it was working
>> in that role for many months, but it's hard to see how it can now be the
>> securityteam@ list, unfortunately (unless your'e speaking alone, of
>> course).
>>> 
>> 
>> As above, the list exists and LO and AOOo members are already on it,
>> Time to declare success and find additional areas to collaborate.
>> 
>>>> I suggested cooperating on translations via
>>>> a shard Pootle instance.
>>> 
>>> Hard to see how that would work since it would require the source to be
>> highly similar and that looks unlikely to be the case.
>>> 
>> 
>> I think the value would come from the "translation memory" aspect.  So
>> even if we had different source files, the UI's of the products are
>> nearly identical, and the underlying concepts of the products remain
>> very the same and likely will remain so for the foreseeable future.
>> (it is not like spreadsheets and word processors have changed much in
>> the past decade).  So there may be some value in sharing translation
>> memory of basic concepts and repeated patterns that are common to
>> describing both products.
>> 
>> It also makes it easier for translators who wish to contribute to both
>> products at once, similar to what ODF Authors has done for
>> documentation.
>> 
>>>>  Or maybe code browsing/searching facilities
>>>> with OpenGrok.  Or either of those possible?
>>> 
>>> Hard to see how two very different source trees can have a shared
>> browser. It would be best for Apache to run its own instance.
>>> 
>>>> Or maybe work on a collaborative Q&A site as an alternative user
>>>> support option?
>>> 
>>> Plausible in the future but a little early to be proposing it - YAGNI
>> applies.
>>> 
>> 
>> A little too early? It looks like someone is already trying this for
>> LO, but they are failing to get enough participation needed to
>> graduate on StackExchange.  So it looks like an area ripe for
>> collaboration:
>> 
>> http://area51.stackexchange.com/proposals/24564/libreoffice
>> 
>>>>  Or maybe a shared template and extensions site?
>>> 
>>> I believe I once proposed such a thing, and was told by both communities
>> that licensing issues would largely prevent it.
>>> 
>> 
>> I certainly proposed such a thing, and licensing was not an issue in
>> my proposal.  Maybe we should revisit, if you think this is a possible
>> area for collaboration?
>> 
>> Any other ideas?
>> 
>>> Delighted to hear you are now such a fan of co-operation though, Rob.
>> I'll be sure to support any viable proposals you present to both
>> communities.
>>> 
>> 
>> I'll continue to float the ideas by you first, Simon.  I'd like you to
>> be able to find some success in your goal to lead these projects to
>> find areas to collaborate.
>> 
>> -Rob
>> 
>>> S.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> 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
View raw message