incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rob Weir <robw...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Policy question: How to link to books about OpenOffice?
Date Tue, 02 Oct 2012 20:31:28 GMT
On Tue, Oct 2, 2012 at 3:50 PM, Louis Suárez-Potts <luispo@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi
>
>
> On Tuesday, 2 October, 2012 at 13:03 , Kay Schenk wrote:
>
> snip
>
>>
>> A bit of history on these. In the past, authors directly contacted OO.o
>> and asked for placement on this list -- no review by OO.o, no direct
>> entry by authors. You will note that a fair number of the entries are
>> from ODFAuthors, but there were others who were regular contributors as
>> well.
>>
> It was not entirely the case that there was no review or editorial scrutiny. There was.
I did not permit obvious scam, pornography, offensive political screeds (or any) or wildly
orthogonal texts. Rather, the texts had to be essentially related to OOo.
>
> The consultants were to a degree also having to be within the same category. But I didn't
keep up with consultants' list for reasons I've gone over and over and over.
>>
>> >
>> > We have three goals/constraints, and they are somewhat conflicting:
>> >
>> > 1) Help the site visitor (typically a user of OpenOffice) to become
>> > more proficient in the product. Ideally we'd recommend the best
>> > titles to them.
>>
>>
>>
>> ...and, in truth, do we know what these are? What we love in terms of
>> explanation, someone else might hate
>>
> Hm. Right now, the list that I rather like and that I think can be used as a kind of
model is the one relating to "Major OpenOffice.org Deployments" (it needs to be updated, btw,
and replaced with the excellent, "Apache OpenOffice").
>
> It's a wiki. Those who have permission to add to it, usually affiliates with this or
that NLC project, would, or they would ask me to update it. The criteria were simple: truth
as determined by a workable link leading to a page reflecting the subject matter declared.
>>
>> >
>> > 2) Encourage the overall ecosystem, by making users aware of the best titles
>
> Yes, but having worked in this ecosystem for over a decade, the titles are not the point.
Rather, what is wanted is material for training, as for ECDL (or ICDL) or LPI or Alyson or
whatever. With the hangover by Oracle to Apache, the material that Frank Peters and his team
had been working on providing training and other educational info. for users of varying levels
disappeared.
>
> So, what will build an ecosystem is that kind of stuff. Other material will surely help
but not directly.
>
> There also has to be a kind of concerted effort, of course.
>
>> >
>> > 3) Be fair, impartial, and tread carefully when we touch on commercial
>> > ventures, per our non-profit status.
>>
>
>
> can I suggest then that we do what was agreed upon by the OpenOffice.org community council
back in 2005 and state our criteria but situate this and related list information *outside*
of Apache? This relieves us of some anxiety. It also clarifies the relations and missions:
Apache OO does coding and QA and builds community and it is not in the business of business;
but satellite endeavours can be.
>
> Allow me a spasm of frustration. We went through this nearly a decade ago and it was
not a short process nor an easy one nor a finally conclusive one.
>

I hope it is not considered impertinent to revisit this topic more
than once a decade, especially now that we are in a new organization
with new participants.  Remember, the "we" that did this before is not
the same "we" that is doing it now.  I'd like to think that many
things that were difficult or impossible previously might now be done
with less angst.  After all, the project is no longer hosted by a
company that provides its own consulting services for OpenOffice.
That in itself removes many of the obstacles.

> The arrangement was to have such efforts *outside* of the project. We had a kind of inadequate
compromise where we listed and really only listed identities. But the real solution was the
one that was arrived at by the CC and which I've mentioned above: situating the more developed
and edited and thus useful list *outside* of the project and its license and social structure.
>

None of what we're doing hinders any 3rd party.   In fact, since the
work we're doing, gathering the data, building the tools, etc., is all
under the Apache License, any 3rd party would be free to take what we
have and quickly set up a external website to provide more expansive
listings, profiles, recommendations, etc.  And if they respected
trademark, etc., then I think we'd be happy to link to that 3rd party
website as well.

-Rob

> <snip>
>
> louis

Mime
View raw message