incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Dennis E. Hamilton" <>
Subject RE: Rationalizing two OpenOffice websites
Date Mon, 12 Dec 2011 00:00:15 GMT
Rob, are you saying that you would not edit ooo-site simply because it is not being served
as ?

There are many ways that assistance is welcome, especially if folks notice the breakages and
report them in a way where they can be swept up in the preparation of the staging site either
before or after cut-over.  

I believe that is a false contrast.  Perhaps it is simply that folks aren't aware that help
proofing and coming up with fixes to the site are welcome.  

Folks can see the results on ooo-site, come up with further ideas, etc.  Think of it as the
running draft version of the soon-to-migrate site.

 - Dennis

PS 1. This podling has not been in existence for 6 months (yet); site migration and terms
of use was not early on the agenda by any means.  
   2. Leave me out of the hyperbole please.  
   3. I also believe that I said I had no objection to the current wording on the wiki notice.
 If not, I'm saying it now.  I have no objection to this: <>.
 It addresses my fundamental concern.  
   4. And I have had nothing whatsoever to do with any extended duration of this particular
thread.  Although thanks for the inviting mention.

-----Original Message-----
From: Rob Weir [] 
Sent: Sunday, December 11, 2011 12:06
Subject: Re: Rationalizing two OpenOffice websites

[ ... ]

Again, the ability to edit absent the ability to publish, is not going
to encourage effective collaboration.

Let's get to "release early and often" on the website.  Waiting months
for the ability to publish is not healthy for the community.

So what is the least that is required technically to make this live?
We can deal with your and Dennis's 6 month long debate about terms of
use later.

[ ... ]

View raw message