Mailing-List: contact ooo-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: local policy)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws;
  s=s1024; d=yahoo.com;
  h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:References:Message-ID:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding;
  b=AcsxV7JPcS064seOxHQZWTjngF14HO2X4rchpGJsBNMYPD/CuiD90dXyA/euy/J7PbFv5NLgMoGfy71sTsIF0OR7gciKRQ/WD95doeYh7Mj/MxGxVNwJKnWMExgHseGqexA/+qIG5GCcU06iimbFbBAyG+q66XHG0qDHISPwYXk=;
References: 
 <CAP-ksogXE0F86xPMOVV2y4+cyp8mkYN=H_wUTu4b5ZfxnuPjtQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <1331678214.82717.YahooMailNeo@web160904.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
 <4F5FCF7B.5040409@apache.org>
 <1331679634.86326.YahooMailNeo@web160906.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
 <4F5FD85C.2010807@apache.org>
Message-ID: <1331682335.83401.YahooMailNeo@web160903.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2012 16:45:35 -0700 (PDT)
From: Joe Schaefer <joe_schaefer@yahoo.com>
Reply-To: Joe Schaefer <joe_schaefer@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Competition (was: Clarifying facts)
To: "ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org" <ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org>
In-Reply-To: <4F5FD85C.2010807@apache.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

=0A=0A----- Original Message -----=0A=0A> From: Pedro Giffuni <pfg@apache.o=
rg>=0A> To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org=0A> Cc: =0A> Sent: Tuesday, March =
13, 2012 7:29 PM=0A> Subject: Re: Competition (was: Clarifying facts)=0A> =
=0A> On 03/13/12 18:00, Joe Schaefer wrote:=0A>>  ----- Original Message --=
---=0A>> =0A>>>  ...=0A>>> =0A>>>  On 03/13/12 17:36, Joe Schaefer wrote:=
=0A>>>>>> =A0 =A0  At Apache we aren't in competition with other =0A> proje=
cts,=0A>>>>>> =A0 =A0  we provide our work for the public benefit and leave=
=0A>>>>>> =A0 =A0  discretion about adoption to the public.=A0 Please keep=
=0A>>>>>> =A0 =A0  that in mind, and stick to providing resources that=0A>>=
>>>> =A0 =A0  benefit general members of the public.=0A>>>>>> =0A>>>>>> =0A=
>>> =0A>>>  In general I am OK with that, but I think here we talk with the=
 code:=0A>>>  Other projects can take our code and integrate it with their =
project=0A>>>  and we like and encourage that but that doesn't mean we are =
going=0A>>>  to recommend their project in our webpages or wikis.=0A>>> =0A=
>>>  Do you really think we are doing all this hard work to put together=0A=
>>>  a release to recommend people to download something else?=0A>>  Well t=
he thing is, right now the situation is that you haven't =0A> released.=0A>=
>  What you tell people to do between now and then will change as the facts=
=0A>>  change, but informing users about alternatives is actually a way to =
gain=0A>>  their respect, and playing silly games to hide those alternative=
s under=0A>>  the guise that the truth needs to be colored somehow does a d=
isservice=0A>>  to your users, and to the reputation of this project as a p=
roviding a=0A>>  public vendor-neutral resource.=0A> =0A> No, It's really v=
ery simple: we have developer snapshots and we=0A> want people to test them=
. At this precise time we need testers and=0A> people reporting bugs in the=
 release. Bug reports from someone=0A> running LibreOffice are not useful t=
o us.=0A=0AThe question isn't what's useful to *you*, it's what's useful to=
 *them*.=0AYes it'd be great if every user volunteered to be a sacrificial =
guinea=0Apig for us, but users have their own problems to think about too.=
=0A=0A> =0A> No silly games were played, unless you mean the line about try=
ing=0A> LO as an interim solution (by Simon). I personally think such a=0A>=
 suggestion is rather offensive with the developers that have been=0A> putt=
ing a huge effort for this release.=0A=0AYeah well I'm suggesting this isn'=
t the most convivial attitude for you=0Ato adopt as a participant in a publ=
ic charity.=A0 Yes you all should be proud=0Aof your accomplishments to dat=
e, I'm very happy with the progress so far.=0ABut Simon's suggestion about =
using LO isn't offensive to me as an Apache=0Amentor of this project at all=
, and it shouldn't be to you.=A0 No matter what=0Asort of crappy attitude y=
ou get back from LO proponents, you should try=0Ato be the adults in the co=
nversation more often than not.=0A=0A=0A>>>  Sure I love the idea of having=
 a great family playing under the same=0A>>>  umbrella but realistically th=
at is not happening and if people want=0A>>>  to work with us the best plac=
e to do it is here.=0A>>  Well you still have some harder collective choice=
s to make regarding=0A>>  interoperability once you start gearing up for a =
4.0 release that=0A>>  may provide an upgrade path for 3.4 users but will d=
iverge from=0A>>  the plans of the LibreOffice team.=A0 Having an open comm=
unication=0A>>  channel will benefit both communities as well as the entire=
 user=0A>>  base of both products, don't you think?=0A> =0A> This discussio=
n has nothing to do with interoperability. We can=0A> be different and each=
 project will support their own releases=0A> looking at the other over the =
shoulder and still interoperate.=0A> =0A> This said and this is only IMHO: =
I think we can forget about=0A> interoperability beyond the standard ODF. I=
n at least a case=0A> I am aware of, LO is breaking the extensions API and =
has=0A> no interest to share the changes.=0A=0AWell my point was about look=
ing out for the entire user community,=0Aand breaking interoperability for =
extension authors is not a small=0Amatter no matter who does it.=A0 IOW tha=
t is a problem you should=0Awork to resolve with the LO team, not to point =
fingers at each other=0Aabout.