incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Louis Suárez-Potts <lsuarezpo...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Off topic
Date Tue, 13 Dec 2011 16:33:03 GMT
Hi,

On 13 December 2011 11:18, Rob Weir <robweir@apache.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 11:12 AM, Louis Suárez-Potts <luispo@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> On 2011-12-13, at 10:43 , Rob Weir wrote:
>>
>>> This may be a bit hard to imagine, since OOo never really developed
>>> this kind of ecosystem. This was due to license and control issues.
>>> But we have the opportunity now to encourage a healthier ecosystem.
>>
>> You are in error. Actually, OOo did develop numerous such ecosystems where one could
donate funds or contribute work. These were autonomously managed, for the most part, by the
NLC projects. But we also used a central dyad, SPI and TeamOOo, and the contributions were
from users.
>>
>
> Not truly autonomous if they were relying on using the OpenOffice.org
> trademark and suggesting that they officially represented the project.
>
> So we never really had that degree of independence.
>
> -Rob


Let's clarify. Autonomy does not mean independence, and I've long
scrupled at that distinction. I'm not surprised it slipped by you.
Autonomy in the actual useful sense is the ability to act on your own,
but still be to any number of degrees dependent upon the context.
Independence argues freedom from that operational context.

To give an example. The US declared independence. Canada, autonomy.
Canada has the Queen. The US? :-)

The NL projects were and I guess sort of are autonomous, as much as I
could make them, while being part of the originating context and thus
commons, so that they ultimately gained their value as much from their
actions as from the commons to which they contributed the fruit of
their work and which tried to return the favour.

They did use the trademark, and we did have conditions on it. But they
named themselves as they wanted  (this I was critiqued for allowing)
and did other things that they could, as I felt they had the best
insight into their operational context.

Examples of success: BrOffice, which is also, probably an example of
failure, at least according to some models.

Louis

Mime
View raw message