incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Donald Harbison <>
Subject Re: working on a OpenOffice roadmap
Date Thu, 20 Oct 2011 13:44:16 GMT
Forgot  my footnote: [1]

On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 9:41 AM, Donald Harbison <>wrote:

> On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 5:02 AM, Martin Hollmichel <
>> wrote:
>> Hi,
>> Wether to stay with OpenOffice or LibreOffice or to migrate to LibreOffice
>> or to OpenOffce is a question in the recent past often occurred, by users,
>> by people doing business with OpenOffice, by the press. The answer I would
>> like to give is that this question is not really that relevant because there
>> is a roadmap in place and both projects plan to stay close together.
>> I suggest following actions:
>> * A call to LibreOffice contributors also to contribute their changes to
>> Apache as the ASF is the long desired independent foundation for
>> On this basis a collaboration among the
>> Apache Project and TDF can be achieved and duplication of efforts get
>> avoided. As a result the question which project/product to choose is not
>> that important any more.
>> * Provide an 3.3.1 micro release showing the world that
>> continues to move (assuming that an production stable 3.4
>> release is not ready to get happen within the next months), this release
>> should include a prominent statement to show the upcoming roadmap with the
>> next releases. This 3.3.x release may not comply with the ASF standards but
>> is an ideal vehicle for doing communication and elaborate on the transition
>> from the old to the new environment.
>  The focus of the PPMC is aiming to speed towards an Apache 3.4 release,
> meeting ASF release guidelines. Yes, there is  some work to move through the
> 3rd party code and resolve the issues. I covered this briefly in my blog
> post.[1]
> Spending time on a 3.3.1 'micro-release' doesn't do much except  consume
> resources. It would be far preferable to focus our resources as a team on
> the Apache 3.4 release effort, IMHO.
>> * Work on a model or agreement where user donations specific to the
>> project can be continued. This is not only a matter for the ASF (and Team
>> OOo), but for the overall community and we need to find ways to include them
>> (including TDF) into this discussion. It is required that we have a clear
>> communication on how donations will benefit the project and to provide
>> transparency on the execution. A donation model shall give users a more
>> direct possibility to influence the further development of the product
>> without the filtering by own interests of a profit orientated organization.
>> We need to include the expertise of people doing business with OpenOffice
>> into this approach, so doing this discussion also on
>> <**>might makes
>> sense. The employment of full time developers sponsored and directed by the
>> community is IHMO a very good chance and would be examplary for the bigger
>> opensource projects. I think this model is already to be proven as working
>> fine for small OS projects and we now got that chance to introduce this also
>> for
> It may be best to start a [DISCUUSS] thread on this. Shane will advise on
> proper use of Apache marks and branding. He has already advised you on the
> imminent change in mail  list infrastructure. You could open the discussion
> here on ooo-dev, since there are TDF folks here already. It will be
> challenging to broker a model that will be satisfactory to both TDF and the
> AOOo project communities. Funding to support LibreOffice developers will not
> benefit the AOOo project unless the developer(s) see fit to sign an ICLA and
> provide the patches within ASF guidelines. This has the potential to benefit
> both projects, but there has been little evident support for this approach
> from the LibreOffice developer(s) to date.
>> Martin
>> PS: I intentionally leave out the Apache vs. GNU license paradigm in these
>> thoughts, assuming that this not the point for most users using product and
>> discussion about this topic are quite predictable.
>> ost users at the consumer level do not have a strong view on the license
>>  of the sofware. This is not the case for some large enterprises. Re-opening
>> the license debate will not be productive. There are many past threads on
>> this in the archive already.

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