incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Joe Schaefer <>
Subject Re: Competition (was: Clarifying facts)
Date Wed, 14 Mar 2012 00:30:16 GMT
----- Original Message -----

> From: Pedro Giffuni <>
> To:
> Cc: 
> Sent: Tuesday, March 13, 2012 8:14 PM
> Subject: Re: Competition (was: Clarifying facts)
> On 03/13/12 18:45, Joe Schaefer wrote:
>>>  No, It's really very simple: we have developer snapshots and we
>>>  want people to test them. At this precise time we need testers and
>>>  people reporting bugs in the release. Bug reports from someone
>>>  running LibreOffice are not useful to us.
>>  The question isn't what's useful to *you*, it's what's 
> useful to *them*.
>>  Yes it'd be great if every user volunteered to be a sacrificial guinea
>>  pig for us, but users have their own problems to think about too.
> Well ... I don't think that LibreOffice would be the best option. To
> be honest I would point people to Microsoft Office. It has
> less bugs, it has full support and every time you buy it you
> help the economy and the many professional developers
> behind it that feed their families.
> If people can't afford that and/or you mean strictly an OpenOffice
> replacement... end users would by happy with Lotus Symphony
> which is free. (no FreeBSD port yet though).
> Both options would mean someone else would be helping them, not
> me, and I can't really take the responsibility if their experience in
> another camp becomes sour so I recommend what I know and
> control. It's not like I am going to take Google out of their choices.

Good luck with that in a codebase of this size.  Pretending that you
have some control over what goes on in this project is naive, you control
what you do with your own time and your own brain and not much else.
The only measure of control afforded to you beyond that is veto power.

>>>  No silly games were played, unless you mean the line about trying
>>>  LO as an interim solution (by Simon). I personally think such a
>>>  suggestion is rather offensive with the developers that have been
>>>  putting a huge effort for this release.
>>  Yeah well I'm suggesting this isn't the most convivial attitude for 
> you
>>  to adopt as a participant in a public charity.  Yes you all should be proud
>>  of your accomplishments to date, I'm very happy with the progress so 
> far.
>>  But Simon's suggestion about using LO isn't offensive to me as an 
> Apache
>>  mentor of this project at all, and it shouldn't be to you.  No matter 
> what
>>  sort of crappy attitude you get back from LO proponents, you should try
>>  to be the adults in the conversation more often than not.
> I don't think anyone is being a child here but at this point we all have
> one objective: release. Anything else seems out-of-place and is not
> really what we do for helping people.

Still arguing from the what's best for the developers instead of what's
best for the general public at this particular point in time.  No I'm
not saying that LO advocacy is essential in the interim, but denying
their existence doesn't do this project credit either.

Lemme set the record straight about what I've seen subversion do:
last year they mentored a GSoC student who wanted to develop a better
subversion -> git migration tool than what git-svn does natively.
Instead of laughing at the student, they worked with him on the proposal
and Google accepted it.  At that point they made him a "partial committer"
and oversaw his work in their subversion repo.  They brought him along
to the point where the code was good enough to go into a release, and
if you look for svnrdump you will see it's already in the 1.7 line.

Contrast that with the attitude the AOO developer team would show to
a person wanting to contribute an AOO -> LO migration tool to the ASF.
Like night and day.

>>  Well my point was about looking out for the entire user community,
>>  and breaking interoperability for extension authors is not a small
>>  matter no matter who does it.  IOW that is a problem you should
>>  work to resolve with the LO team, not to point fingers at each other
>>  about.
> I *am* looking at the entire community but this particular line of
> discussion has no connection with the technical issues which
> have and will likely continue to appear.

Fair enough.

View raw message