Mailing-List: contact dev-help@openoffice.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
Received-SPF: neutral (athena.apache.org: local policy)
Message-ID: <50FAFA4D.2060307@apache.org>
Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2013 21:08:37 +0100
From: Andrea Pescetti <pescetti@apache.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US;
 rv:1.9.2.24) Gecko/20111108 Fedora/3.1.16-1.fc14 Thunderbird/3.1.16
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
Subject: Re: Symphony code in AOO 4.0
References: 
 <CAP-ksogZORGLzwmYdkxnQNooCo2UKyG+wmju4k0wujJPCma47g@mail.gmail.com>
	<50EF64C6.1050706@apache.org>
	<CAP-ksogjAj=4N54v2+kX7ihOW3dKV=kD1zEQxJ7Opwq4AgODbg@mail.gmail.com>
	<50F5C56E.4030805@apache.org>
 <CAP-ksog3Fo-3bJWhmqjVEAvizBMK5AfoRJouaptSejCdBnWzvQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAP-ksog3Fo-3bJWhmqjVEAvizBMK5AfoRJouaptSejCdBnWzvQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On 16/01/2013 Rob Weir wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 4:09 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
>> the Symphony contribution in itself is worth to be
>> properly acknowledged and get exposure.
> Agreed.  So I am glad then that you made the call for additional blog
> authors.  It is probably best if the Symphony contribution is
> acknowledged, etc., by a non-IBM project member.  That would make it
> harder to dismiss it in some quarters.

I can try to understand these concerns, but from a practical point of 
view it is quite difficult for someone who is not a (former) Symphony 
team member, or who wasn't involved with porting code from Symphony, to 
write a meaningful post about the improvements that the Symphony 
contribution made possible.

For example, analyzing the hundreds of [From Symphony] issues would not 
be feasible for me. Well, let's see if someone else takes the challenge, 
but honestly there's nobody better than the people who know Symphony to 
describe what was ported and what areas will benefit from its code most...

Regards,
   Andrea.