incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rob Weir <>
Subject Re: press announcement for AOO 3.4
Date Sat, 03 Mar 2012 14:47:29 GMT
On Sat, Mar 3, 2012 at 3:45 AM, Jörg Schmidt <> wrote:
> Hello,
> Rob Weir wrote:
>>  I don't see the need for fragmentation.
> And i dont see 'fragmentation'.
> Rob, i think we understand only the concepts or words differently. "entity for national
or local press releases" is only a synonym for people who write drafts for national press
releases and bring this drafts in discussion by Apache.
>> The project speaks in one voice.  With the help of volunteers we can
>> speak in many languages.  But we cannot have sub-groups within the
>> project making press releases on behalf of the project,   All press
>> releases come from the entire project, and require review and approval
>> from the PMC, as well as Apache.
> And thats is very fine, but is it really necessary that all work is done there, all drafts
are written?

I'm talking about final sign-off.  Of course, normal Apache principles
apply here.  Our work is done openly, on the mailing lists.
Transparency is important.

Since the PMC will, in the end, need to approve press releases, it
would be to your advantage to engage them (and Press@) as early as
possible.  So instead of creating a complete press release and then
asking for approval, it would be better to start with a note on
ooo-dev describing your overall goal, and why you think we need a
release.  It is good to have that initial discussion.  Between Press@,
our Mentors and other experts on ooo-dev we have a lot of experience,
as well as contacts.  Maybe we'll suggest a different approach, like a
press interview or a blog post?  Maybe we're escalate and have a press
release from Apache?  Maybe we're love your idea and expand it to
include an English press release as well.

>> Think of it this way: OpenOffice supports multiple languages.  But we
>> don't have independent groups compiling and releases OpenOffice.  We
>> work together to have a single, multilingual product.
> Rob, i am sorry, but you are dont understand that AOO is more then technical thing. AOO
is also a product for consumers called "users".
> These AOO-users are, by their nature, all other users such as the users of Apache HTTP
Server. The users of Apache HTTP Server are IT-specialists and the users of AOO are normal

The fact that we have consumer users does not mean that project
members can issue press releases without review and approval of the
PMC and Press@.

>> I'm familiar with LiMux, yes.   Is this something that the project
>> needs to speak on?  If so, let's have a draft of the press release.
>> Whether the issue is national, local, or international, it really
>> doesn't make a difference.  The issue is that the press release is on
>> behalf of the Apache OpenOffice project.   If it is in our name, then
>> it needs review.
> OK, clear.
> *Can I send in such cases, a German draft for discussion at*

Yes.  But as mentioned above, it would be better if you first started
a thread here on ooo-dev making a proposal for a press release,
describing in high-level terms the purpose and content.

>> An alternative would be to have a press release from some other
>> organization, like a local German users group or something like that.
>> But it would need to pick a different name.  It could not claim to
>> speak for "Apache OpenOffice".
> Yes, thats clear for me. And I agree with this principle.
> But there is also a problem - *when* local groups must therefore arise *only because*
the people who work in Apache conditions are too difficult, then weakens the project AOO,
because "a local German users group" is, in my opinion, another word for really 'fragmentation'.

I don't see it as a bad thing.  Groups outside of AOO have some
advantages, e.g., they can raise funds, hire developers, issue press
releases, etc.  Members of such groups can also be members of the
Apache OpenOffice project.   Of course, their are benefits of working
entirely within the AOO project.

>> >> I don't see a problem with that.
>> >
>> > I see a problem if for month users being not informed
>> enough and (OOo)/AOO constantly users loses. You not?
>> >
>> No one is denying that we would benefit from more information.
>> > And I see a problem if it is for beginners so difficult to
>> understand the workings of Apache. Many of us who are not
>> developers want to work for the success of AOO, but do not
>> always understand ways of working.
>> >
>> Maybe it would help to think of it this way:
>> There are many ways in which we can make information available about
>> the project.  They differ in level of formality.
>> [...]
> OK, give me some time, I would first like to talk with others to better understand these
>> If this isn't clear, then please ask more questions.
> It is formally clear, but I do not understand why Apache is apparently wants everything
to work itself.

I would not think of "Apache" in this instance as being something
external to the product.  AOO is the project, the PMC working on
ooo-dev, listening to feedback from all project contributors and
users, as well as Mentors and Press@.   What this really means is that
decision making on communications is very flat, not hierarchical.
Bringing these questions to ooo-dev and the PMC is not a matter of
bring the decisions to a smaller group of elite decision makers.  It
is a matter of bringing the question to a broader group of
international project members.  It is a broadening of the review, not
a narrowing.

> It would be very helpful to me if you would confirm once again that it is possible proposals
or drafts  for national press releases should be sent to Apache for discussing.

Yes, and it is much preferred that you start a new thread on ooo-dev
with a high-level proposal.  We can all be much more helpful if you
start that way.

> I, or the German AOO community do not want to speak for Apache or for AOO, but we want
to contribute together to address the users of AOO, eg through press releases.


>> In any case, it is probably worth us thinking about a communications
>> plan for the 3.4 release, one that will have local variations.
> OK, fine.
> Jörg

View raw message