You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to general@incubator.apache.org by Jim Jagielski <ji...@jaguNET.com> on 2011/06/03 22:14:04 UTC
OOo - Lines in the sand and pre-determined conclusions...
Posts such as:
http://itmanagement.earthweb.com/osrc/article.php/3935136/LibreOffice-340-Released-as-OpenOffice-Heads-to-Apache.htm
certainly don't help. It just reinforces a perceived division
as well as almost forcing the "other side" to take a defensive
stance.
It's a shame.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: OOo - Lines in the sand and pre-determined conclusions...
Posted by Jim Jagielski <ji...@jaguNET.com>.
On Sat, Jun 04, 2011 at 06:19:06AM -0500, Norbert Thiebaud wrote:
> Jagielski says what is "typical" for Apache is "building (or even
> "_re-building_") communities around those codebases."
Which is true. It does not say that TDF is not able to.
> ...
> He says that makes Apache the perfect place to "help '_repair_' the
> community" around OpenOffice.org
The community is fractured, is it not? So our history of
community created code *is* a perfect place to *help*
repair it. Notice the word "help". It implies cooperation
with others who also help repair it.
--
===========================================================================
Jim Jagielski [|] jim@jaguNET.com [|] http://www.jaguNET.com/
"Great is the guilt of an unnecessary war" ~ John Adams
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: OOo - Lines in the sand and pre-determined conclusions...
Posted by Cor Nouws <oo...@nouenoff.nl>.
Hi Jim,
Jim Jagielski wrote (04-06-11 19:42)
> I must have significantly misinterpreted the below:
>
> "However, I do not believe the ASF is likely to provide a good home
> for the OO.o project in the long run," Meeks said. "They are
> sufficiently confident and comfortable with their model that
> attempting to negotiate over changing any core aspect of it (such as
> the non-copy-left stance) is unlikely to be fruitful work. So - only
> time will tell."
Yes you did, Pls read my mail from 0:35 UTC last night in this thread.
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-general/201106.mbox/browser
Cor
--
- http://nl.libreoffice.org
- giving openoffice.org its foundation :: The Document Foundation -
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: OOo - Lines in the sand and pre-determined conclusions...
Posted by Jim Jagielski <ji...@jaguNET.com>.
On Jun 4, 2011, at 8:39 AM, Cor Nouws wrote:
> Hi Jim,
>
> Jim Jagielski wrote (04-06-11 12:33)
>> On Sat, Jun 04, 2011 at 11:52:48AM +0200, Cor Nouws wrote:
>>>
>>> Hmm, got that wrong I see now
>>> http://www.networkworld.com/community/apache-president-jim-jagielski-talks-openoffice-org
>>>
>>> Which is no problem for me, but obviously I misunderstood your
>>> statement about not talking to the press.
>>>
>>
>> Tell me where in that post anyone from the ASF is openly critical
>> of TDF or strongly implies that TDF's "ideological" stance will
>> be a factor in breaking any cooperation.
>
> I did not say that. But it was said of the interview with Meeks, which we found out not to be true either.
>
I must have significantly misinterpreted the below:
"However, I do not believe the ASF is likely to provide a good home for the OO.o project in the long run," Meeks said. "They are sufficiently confident and comfortable with their model that attempting to negotiate over changing any core aspect of it (such as the non-copy-left stance) is unlikely to be fruitful work. So - only time will tell."
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: OOo - Lines in the sand and pre-determined conclusions...
Posted by Cor Nouws <oo...@nouenoff.nl>.
Hi Jim,
Jim Jagielski wrote (04-06-11 12:33)
> On Sat, Jun 04, 2011 at 11:52:48AM +0200, Cor Nouws wrote:
>>
>> Hmm, got that wrong I see now
>> http://www.networkworld.com/community/apache-president-jim-jagielski-talks-openoffice-org
>>
>> Which is no problem for me, but obviously I misunderstood your
>> statement about not talking to the press.
>>
>
> Tell me where in that post anyone from the ASF is openly critical
> of TDF or strongly implies that TDF's "ideological" stance will
> be a factor in breaking any cooperation.
I did not say that. But it was said of the interview with Meeks, which
we found out not to be true either.
> That is the difference. Outwardly and publicly the ASF is stressing
> the good and the potential of this effort. Whereas there appears
> a concerted effort by others to derail it and portray the ASF as
> the pawns of IBM/Oracle or as agents of anti-FOSS/anti-LOo actions.
If that is the feeling you get, there is something wrong.
I do not see any sense in criticizing the ASF, just because they have a
different view. Seems you get hit by pieces flying around that belong in
the IBM - TDF dispute ;-) Sorry about that, maybe a bit more precise
wording (from me and others) here and there would help, but I'm not sure
if it would fully prevent that happening.
Cor
--
- http://nl.libreoffice.org
- giving openoffice.org its foundation :: The Document Foundation -
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: OOo - Lines in the sand and pre-determined conclusions...
Posted by Ian Lynch <ia...@gmail.com>.
On 4 June 2011 11:33, Jim Jagielski <ji...@jagunet.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 04, 2011 at 11:52:48AM +0200, Cor Nouws wrote:
> >
> > Hmm, got that wrong I see now
> >
> http://www.networkworld.com/community/apache-president-jim-jagielski-talks-openoffice-org
> >
> > Which is no problem for me, but obviously I misunderstood your
> > statement about not talking to the press.
> >
>
> Tell me where in that post anyone from the ASF is openly critical
> of TDF or strongly implies that TDF's "ideological" stance will
> be a factor in breaking any cooperation.
>
> That is the difference. Outwardly and publicly the ASF is stressing
> the good and the potential of this effort. Whereas there appears
> a concerted effort by others to derail it and portray the ASF as
> the pawns of IBM/Oracle or as agents of anti-FOSS/anti-LOo actions.
>
I think this is a little extreme :-) I don't see much positive efforts at
derailing, just people trying to work out what it all means in terms of
their own perspective, value systems and their ownership of their work. I
think the discussions are surprisingly cordial given the circumstances. EQ
is going to be just as important as IQ in resolving all this.
> --
> ===========================================================================
> Jim Jagielski [|] jim@jaguNET.com [|] http://www.jaguNET.com/
> "Great is the guilt of an unnecessary war" ~ John Adams
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
> --
Ian
Ofqual Accredited IT Qualifications
The Schools ITQ
www.theINGOTs.org +44 (0)1827 305940
You have received this email from the following company: The Learning
Machine Limited, Reg Office, 36 Ashby Road, Tamworth, Staffordshire, B79
8AQ. Reg No: 05560797, Registered in England and Wales.
Re: OOo - Lines in the sand and pre-determined conclusions...
Posted by Norbert Thiebaud <nt...@gmail.com>.
On Sat, Jun 4, 2011 at 6:27 AM, Ian Lynch <ia...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I can see why some might read into those statements implications that
> probably were not intended. That is the problem with perspectives :-)
I used these quote to illustrate that and to put that in parallel with
the complaint about Michael Meeks being quoted by a journalist in
terms deemed not pleasant toward Apache.
Given any article out there and given any personal preference, one can
always find something to be offended about if one squint hard enough
:-)
It's a one of these many things that cut both ways...
Norbert
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: OOo - Lines in the sand and pre-determined conclusions...
Posted by Ian Lynch <ia...@gmail.com>.
On 4 June 2011 12:19, Norbert Thiebaud <nt...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 4, 2011 at 5:33 AM, Jim Jagielski <ji...@jagunet.com> wrote:
> > On Sat, Jun 04, 2011 at 11:52:48AM +0200, Cor Nouws wrote:
> >>
> >> Hmm, got that wrong I see now
> >>
> http://www.networkworld.com/community/apache-president-jim-jagielski-talks-openoffice-org
> >>
> >> Which is no problem for me, but obviously I misunderstood your
> >> statement about not talking to the press.
> >>
> >
> > Tell me where in that post anyone from the ASF is openly critical
> > of TDF or strongly implies that TDF's "ideological" stance will
> > be a factor in breaking any cooperation.
> >
> > That is the difference. Outwardly and publicly the ASF is stressing
> > the good and the potential of this effort.
>
> like:
>
> Jagielski says what is "typical" for Apache is "building (or even
> "_re-building_") communities around those codebases."
> ...
> He says that makes Apache the perfect place to "help '_repair_' the
> community" around OpenOffice.org
> ...
> Weir also encourages the idea of doing core OO.org development in
> Apache and then having additional work done by _derivatives_.
> ...
> ?
I can see why some might read into those statements implications that
probably were not intended. That is the problem with perspectives :-)
Is this saying TDF is responsible for breaking the OOo community? - I don't
think so but some might read it as that. We all know the age old problem of
communication by mailing list or news article.
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>
--
Ian
Ofqual Accredited IT Qualifications
The Schools ITQ
www.theINGOTs.org +44 (0)1827 305940
You have received this email from the following company: The Learning
Machine Limited, Reg Office, 36 Ashby Road, Tamworth, Staffordshire, B79
8AQ. Reg No: 05560797, Registered in England and Wales.
Re: OOo - Lines in the sand and pre-determined conclusions...
Posted by Norbert Thiebaud <nt...@gmail.com>.
On Sat, Jun 4, 2011 at 5:33 AM, Jim Jagielski <ji...@jagunet.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 04, 2011 at 11:52:48AM +0200, Cor Nouws wrote:
>>
>> Hmm, got that wrong I see now
>> http://www.networkworld.com/community/apache-president-jim-jagielski-talks-openoffice-org
>>
>> Which is no problem for me, but obviously I misunderstood your
>> statement about not talking to the press.
>>
>
> Tell me where in that post anyone from the ASF is openly critical
> of TDF or strongly implies that TDF's "ideological" stance will
> be a factor in breaking any cooperation.
>
> That is the difference. Outwardly and publicly the ASF is stressing
> the good and the potential of this effort.
like:
Jagielski says what is "typical" for Apache is "building (or even
"_re-building_") communities around those codebases."
...
He says that makes Apache the perfect place to "help '_repair_' the
community" around OpenOffice.org
...
Weir also encourages the idea of doing core OO.org development in
Apache and then having additional work done by _derivatives_.
...
?
Norbert
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: OOo - Lines in the sand and pre-determined conclusions...
Posted by Jim Jagielski <ji...@jaguNET.com>.
On Sat, Jun 04, 2011 at 11:52:48AM +0200, Cor Nouws wrote:
>
> Hmm, got that wrong I see now
> http://www.networkworld.com/community/apache-president-jim-jagielski-talks-openoffice-org
>
> Which is no problem for me, but obviously I misunderstood your
> statement about not talking to the press.
>
Tell me where in that post anyone from the ASF is openly critical
of TDF or strongly implies that TDF's "ideological" stance will
be a factor in breaking any cooperation.
That is the difference. Outwardly and publicly the ASF is stressing
the good and the potential of this effort. Whereas there appears
a concerted effort by others to derail it and portray the ASF as
the pawns of IBM/Oracle or as agents of anti-FOSS/anti-LOo actions.
--
===========================================================================
Jim Jagielski [|] jim@jaguNET.com [|] http://www.jaguNET.com/
"Great is the guilt of an unnecessary war" ~ John Adams
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: OOo - Lines in the sand and pre-determined conclusions...
Posted by Jim Jagielski <ji...@jaguNET.com>.
On Fri, Jun 03, 2011 at 10:50:43PM +0200, Cor Nouws wrote:
> Hi Jim, all,
>
> I do not understand why that should be a shame.
> All I read is explanation of the situation, among which implicitly
> an important difference: the copy-left versus non copy-left. That is
> a personal style, choice that is one of the reasons d'?tre of
> LibreOffice.
> Indeed a line in the sand. But putting ones head in the sand, by not
> acknowledging it, would make little sense IMO.
>
If really curious about why I thought it a shame, please let me
know and I'd be happy to explain...
--
===========================================================================
Jim Jagielski [|] jim@jaguNET.com [|] http://www.jaguNET.com/
"Great is the guilt of an unnecessary war" ~ John Adams
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
RE: OOo - Lines in the sand and pre-determined conclusions...
Posted by "Noel J. Bergman" <no...@devtech.com>.
Charles-H. Schulz wrote:
> To put an end to speculation on the "TDF is a bunch of extremists
> therefore Oracle did not choose them", here's TDF's official statement:
>
http://blog.documentfoundation.org/2011/06/06/publishing-our-recommendation-
to-oracle/
I already pulled from that site, and quoted the relevant part. No one said
that TDF "is a bunch of extremists." TDF is entitled to its license of
choice, but we cannot ignore that those choices have impact.
We have seen collaboration proposed within the constraints of that license
choice, and some people have also suggested that *IF* TDF were to change
that license choice (and *IF* it *can*), how that might impact beneficially.
I'm not sure if I've actually seen a single negative thing said about TDF.
--- Noel
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: OOo - Lines in the sand and pre-determined conclusions...
Posted by "Charles-H. Schulz" <ch...@documentfoundation.org>.
Hello everyone,
2011/6/7 Cor Nouws <oo...@nouenoff.nl>
> Noel J. Bergman wrote (07-06-11 02:03)
>
> Michael Meeks:
>
> "I do not believe the ASF is likely to provide a good home for
>>>> the OO.o project in the long run."
>>>>
>>>
> You:
>
> I agree; you draw the same inference that I do: he means that a
>> non-copyleft license is the reason for (predicted eventual) failure.
>>
>
> Is 'Not likely to be a good home' the same as 'failure' ? Sure not in this
> case. It just means that the Apache solution does not cater for an important
> part of the community.
>
>
> That attitude is most likely why (IMO) the "obvious" candidate wasn't
>> used when Oracle decided to transfer OpenOffice.
>>
>
> Even more speculations, LOL
> And OT (interesting how this whole subject drives me/you/others this
> route).
>
>
>
To put an end to speculation on the "TDF is a bunch of extremists therefore
Oracle did not choose them", here's TDF's official statement:
http://blog.documentfoundation.org/2011/06/06/publishing-our-recommendation-to-oracle/
Hope this will answer many questions.
Best,
Charles.
Re: OOo - Lines in the sand and pre-determined conclusions...
Posted by Cor Nouws <oo...@nouenoff.nl>.
Noel J. Bergman wrote (07-06-11 02:03)
Michael Meeks:
>>> "I do not believe the ASF is likely to provide a good home for
>>> the OO.o project in the long run."
You:
> I agree; you draw the same inference that I do: he means that a
> non-copyleft license is the reason for (predicted eventual) failure.
Is 'Not likely to be a good home' the same as 'failure' ? Sure not in
this case. It just means that the Apache solution does not cater for an
important part of the community.
> That attitude is most likely why (IMO) the "obvious" candidate wasn't
> used when Oracle decided to transfer OpenOffice.
Even more speculations, LOL
And OT (interesting how this whole subject drives me/you/others this route).
> Licensing matters. IBM and others prefer an Open Source license,
> which allows a level playing field, rather than the inequity of
> GPL+proprietary, but they are not interested sharing everything.
A know discussion indeed.
Cheers,
--
- Cor
- http://nl.libreoffice.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
RE: OOo - Lines in the sand and pre-determined conclusions...
Posted by "Noel J. Bergman" <no...@devtech.com>.
Cor Nouws wrote:
> Noel J. Bergman wrote (06-06-11 23:51)
>> Conclusion:
>>
>> "I do not believe the ASF is likely to provide a good home for the
>> OO.o project in the long run."
>>
>> Supporting statements:
>> [...]
>
> Supporting explanation ;-)
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-general/201106.mbox/%3C4DE97E04.20202@nouenoff.nl%3E
So, "For me it is obvious that this statement is because there is strong involvement in LibreOffice from people that do not want to work with non-copyleft and Apache licence."
I agree; you draw the same inference that I do: he means that a non-copyleft license is the reason for (predicted eventual) failure. That attitude is most likely why (IMO) the "obvious" candidate wasn't used when Oracle decided to transfer OpenOffice.
Licensing matters. IBM and others prefer an Open Source license, which allows a level playing field, rather than the inequity of GPL+proprietary, but they are not interested sharing everything.
--- Noel
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: OOo - Lines in the sand and pre-determined conclusions...
Posted by Cor Nouws <oo...@nouenoff.nl>.
Cor Nouws wrote (07-06-11 00:31)
> Noel J. Bergman wrote (06-06-11 23:51)
>> Conclusion:
>>
>> "I do not believe the ASF is likely to provide a good home for the
>> OO.o project in the long run."
>>
>> Supporting statements:
>> [...]
>
> Supporting explanation ;-)
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-general/201106.mbox/browser
Or better this link
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-general/201106.mbox/%3C4DE97E04.20202@nouenoff.nl%3E
(apologies)
--
- Cor
- http://nl.libreoffice.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: OOo - Lines in the sand and pre-determined conclusions...
Posted by Cor Nouws <oo...@nouenoff.nl>.
Noel J. Bergman wrote (06-06-11 23:51)
> Conclusion:
>
> "I do not believe the ASF is likely to provide a good home for the OO.o project in the long run."
>
> Supporting statements:
> [...]
Supporting explanation ;-)
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-general/201106.mbox/browser
--
- Cor
- http://nl.libreoffice.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
RE: OOo - Lines in the sand and pre-determined conclusions...
Posted by "Noel J. Bergman" <no...@devtech.com>.
Michael,
Conclusion:
"I do not believe the ASF is likely to provide a good home for the OO.o project in the long run."
Supporting statements:
"They are sufficiently confident and comfortable with their model that attempting to negotiate over changing any core aspect of it (such as the non-copy-left stance) is unlikely to be fruitful work."
"The ASF has a very well designed governance, and a very experienced team, and some excellent licensing for specific situations."
"I believe that the Apache licensing and policies are for the most part extremely mature, very applicable and effective in certain projects, and fundamentally non-negotiable."
I fail to see how you draw the conclusion from the supporting arguments. One can infer from your supporting statements that you see licensing as the issue. But you've failed to draw the connection between the license and your conclusion. As an Epistemologist, I'm kind of interested in such nits.
--- Noel
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: OOo - Lines in the sand and pre-determined conclusions...
Posted by Michael Meeks <mi...@novell.com>.
Hi Jim,
On Fri, 2011-06-03 at 16:14 -0400, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> certainly don't help. It just reinforces a perceived division
> as well as almost forcing the "other side" to take a defensive
> stance.
Hey ho; I see my name being taken intravenously ;-) so the longer quote
from a private mail from which this was excerpted that I sent to Sean
(who I think summarised it fairly) was:
The ASF has a very well designed governance, and a very
experienced team, and some excellent licensing for specific
situations, and I love their open-ness and robust discussion
which is refreshing to see wrt. OO.o. <quote> "However, I do not
believe the ASF is likely to provide a good home for the OO.o
project in the long run. They are sufficiently confident and
comfortable with their model that attempting to negotiate over
changing any core aspect of it (such as the non-copy-left
stance) is unlikely to be fruitful work. So - only time will
tell. </quote>
There is only so much sweetness and light I can prefix to honey my
basic conviction expressed as an individual :-) Hopefully one that you
heard from me directly first. Furthermore, I believe that the Apache
licensing and policies are for the most part extremely mature, very
applicable and effective in certain projects, and fundamentally
non-negotiable. These are the 'core aspects' I'm trying to get at as
pointless to discuss changing.
Reading the threads here, I hardly think that is controversial, but
perhaps I missed something - I certainly don't want to shame anyone.
Furthermore, if journalists come and ask questions, and others are
speaking to the media - I don't see any substantial ethical problem with
doing so too.
Apologies if it came across badly,
ATB,
Michael.
--
michael.meeks@novell.com <><, Pseudo Engineer, itinerant idiot
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: OOo - Lines in the sand and pre-determined conclusions...
Posted by Ian Lynch <ia...@gmail.com>.
What seems clear is that at least to start with we will have an apache
licensed product and a copy left product. Why not just accept this as
healthy diversity?
On 4 Jun 2011 00:42, "Cor Nouws" <oo...@nouenoff.nl> wrote:
Greg Stein wrote (03-06-11 23:48)
>
> On Fri, Jun 3, 2011 at 16:50, Cor Nouws<oo...@nouenoff.nl> wrote:
>> I do not understand why that should be a shame.
>
>
> The article portrays Michael as a spokesper...
I would not understand the interview as denigrating your work here.
(But that could be my culture, language. Not sure)
> is fine for individuals to have opinions, but when it starts to get
> portrayed at a community l...
Cor
--
- http://nl.libreoffice.org
- giving openoffice.org its foundation :: The Document Founda...
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: ge...
Re: OOo - Lines in the sand and pre-determined conclusions...
Posted by Cor Nouws <oo...@nouenoff.nl>.
Greg Stein wrote (03-06-11 23:48)
> On Fri, Jun 3, 2011 at 16:50, Cor Nouws<oo...@nouenoff.nl> wrote:
>> I do not understand why that should be a shame.
>
> The article portrays Michael as a spokesperson for the LibreOffice
> community. And then Michael proceeds to denigrate the effort here. It
I would not understand the interview as denigrating your work here.
(But that could be my culture, language. Not sure)
> is fine for individuals to have opinions, but when it starts to get
> portrayed at a community level... well. Not so nice.
Cor
--
- http://nl.libreoffice.org
- giving openoffice.org its foundation :: The Document Foundation -
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: OOo - Lines in the sand and pre-determined conclusions...
Posted by Cor Nouws <oo...@nouenoff.nl>.
Cor Nouws wrote (04-06-11 01:49)
> Greg Stein wrote (04-06-11 01:10)
>
>> That is the key difference. general@incubator is not talking to the
>> press.
>
> It is an Apache process. Seems logic to me that you do not talk to the
> press about that (at this stage).
Hmm, got that wrong I see now
http://www.networkworld.com/community/apache-president-jim-jagielski-talks-openoffice-org
Which is no problem for me, but obviously I misunderstood your statement
about not talking to the press.
Cor
--
- http://nl.libreoffice.org
- giving openoffice.org its foundation :: The Document Foundation -
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: OOo - Lines in the sand and pre-determined conclusions...
Posted by Cor Nouws <oo...@nouenoff.nl>.
Greg Stein wrote (04-06-11 02:56)
> rather than talk bad about
Still not get that 'bad' ;-)
--
- http://nl.libreoffice.org
- giving openoffice.org its foundation :: The Document Foundation -
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: OOo - Lines in the sand and pre-determined conclusions...
Posted by Greg Stein <gs...@gmail.com>.
On Fri, Jun 3, 2011 at 20:36, Cor Nouws <oo...@nouenoff.nl> wrote:
> Greg Stein wrote (04-06-11 02:23)
>> On Fri, Jun 3, 2011 at 19:49, Cor Nouws<oo...@nouenoff.nl> wrote:
>...
>>> I don't see any smack in it. I read he is giving his opinion in a polite
>>> manner. (Have seen different quotes from him in the past ..). And also
>>> complimenting the ASF.
>>
>> "However, I do not believe the ASF is likely to provide a good home
>> for the OO.o project in the long run," Meeks said.
>
> OK, now I understand where your impression comes from. For me it is obvious
> that this statement is because there is strong involvement in LibreOffice
> from people that do not want to work with non-copyleft and Apache licence.
> So just another (though indeed rather implicit, explanation of a different
> view on things.)
Oh, I understand where he's coming. Michael and I have exchanged a
number of emails on the subject. I have zero problem with his
position, and even encouraged him to continue to speak out.
I do take some issue with moving it from mailing list discussion over
to the press. That just doesn't seem to be good for anybody (ASF and
TDF).
My mother always told me to just be quiet, rather than talk bad about
other people. I don't always do that right, but it is something to
strive for. Especially if you're talking to a reporter.
Cheers,
-g
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: OOo - Lines in the sand and pre-determined conclusions...
Posted by ro...@us.ibm.com.
Cor Nouws <oo...@nouenoff.nl> wrote on 06/03/2011 08:36:20 PM:
>
> (So seeing Robs questionnaire: it won't be easy to get ground for many
> positive replies. But of course it is good to try. I even might step in
> with some suggestions, that however always tend to fail, since my mind
> does not take large corporate policies into consideration ;-) )
>
And Cor, please, if you see some other possibilities that I'm not seeing,
feel free to augment the list of questions.
-Rob
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: OOo - Lines in the sand and pre-determined conclusions...
Posted by Cor Nouws <oo...@nouenoff.nl>.
Greg Stein wrote (04-06-11 02:23)
> On Fri, Jun 3, 2011 at 19:49, Cor Nouws<oo...@nouenoff.nl> wrote:
>> Greg Stein wrote (04-06-11 01:10)
>>
>>> That is the key difference. general@incubator is not talking to the
>>> press.
>>
>> It is an Apache process. Seems logic to me that you do not talk to the press
>> about that (at this stage).
>> Meeks is being interviewed about what's going on around libreOffice.
>>
>>> I don't see any press where ASF people talking smack about TDF/LO.
>>
>> I don't see any smack in it. I read he is giving his opinion in a polite
>> manner. (Have seen different quotes from him in the past ..). And also
>> complimenting the ASF.
>
> "However, I do not believe the ASF is likely to provide a good home
> for the OO.o project in the long run," Meeks said.
OK, now I understand where your impression comes from. For me it is
obvious that this statement is because there is strong involvement in
LibreOffice from people that do not want to work with non-copyleft and
Apache licence. So just another (though indeed rather implicit,
explanation of a different view on things.)
(So seeing Robs questionnaire: it won't be easy to get ground for many
positive replies. But of course it is good to try. I even might step in
with some suggestions, that however always tend to fail, since my mind
does not take large corporate policies into consideration ;-) )
Cor
--
- http://nl.libreoffice.org
- giving openoffice.org its foundation :: The Document Foundation -
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: OOo - Lines in the sand and pre-determined conclusions...
Posted by Ian Lynch <ia...@gmail.com>.
In the long run we are all dead ;-) So let's concentrate on the short run to
start with.
On 4 Jun 2011 01:24, "Greg Stein" <gs...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, Jun 3, 2011 at 19:49, Cor Nouws <oo...@nouenoff.nl> wrote:
> Greg Stein wrote (04-06-11 01:1...
"However, I do not believe the ASF is likely to provide a good home
for the OO.o project in the long run," Meeks said.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: gener...
Re: OOo - Lines in the sand and pre-determined conclusions...
Posted by Greg Stein <gs...@gmail.com>.
On Fri, Jun 3, 2011 at 19:49, Cor Nouws <oo...@nouenoff.nl> wrote:
> Greg Stein wrote (04-06-11 01:10)
>
>> That is the key difference. general@incubator is not talking to the
>> press.
>
> It is an Apache process. Seems logic to me that you do not talk to the press
> about that (at this stage).
> Meeks is being interviewed about what's going on around libreOffice.
>
>> I don't see any press where ASF people talking smack about TDF/LO.
>
> I don't see any smack in it. I read he is giving his opinion in a polite
> manner. (Have seen different quotes from him in the past ..). And also
> complimenting the ASF.
"However, I do not believe the ASF is likely to provide a good home
for the OO.o project in the long run," Meeks said.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: OOo - Lines in the sand and pre-determined conclusions...
Posted by Cor Nouws <oo...@nouenoff.nl>.
Greg Stein wrote (04-06-11 01:10)
> That is the key difference. general@incubator is not talking to the
> press.
It is an Apache process. Seems logic to me that you do not talk to the
press about that (at this stage).
Meeks is being interviewed about what's going on around libreOffice.
> I don't see any press where ASF people talking smack about TDF/LO.
I don't see any smack in it. I read he is giving his opinion in a polite
manner. (Have seen different quotes from him in the past ..). And also
complimenting the ASF.
Cor
--
- http://nl.libreoffice.org
- giving openoffice.org its foundation :: The Document Foundation -
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: OOo - Lines in the sand and pre-determined conclusions...
Posted by Greg Stein <gs...@gmail.com>.
On Fri, Jun 3, 2011 at 17:57, Benson Margulies <bi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Michael is repeating some invariants that he and other LO/TDF people
> have stated, politely and consistently, since the inception of this
> discussion. They are committed to copyleft, they see dependencies with
> copyleft, their vision of OO is copyleft. There's perfect symmetry
> here: we're making public statements (well, general@incubator) to the
> effect that everything would be unicorns and rainbows if only they'd
> give up on copyleft and adopt the AL, and they're stating the perfect
> converse. We support our argument, they support theirs.
That is the key difference. general@incubator is not talking to the
press. I don't see any press where ASF people talking smack about
TDF/LO.
*shrug*
I think a week will allow us to move past a lot of this stuff and
become more constructive. Just gotta wait...
Cheers,
-g
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: OOo - Lines in the sand and pre-determined conclusions...
Posted by Benson Margulies <bi...@gmail.com>.
Michael is repeating some invariants that he and other LO/TDF people
have stated, politely and consistently, since the inception of this
discussion. They are committed to copyleft, they see dependencies with
copyleft, their vision of OO is copyleft. There's perfect symmetry
here: we're making public statements (well, general@incubator) to the
effect that everything would be unicorns and rainbows if only they'd
give up on copyleft and adopt the AL, and they're stating the perfect
converse. We support our argument, they support theirs.
This is going to be a battle for the hearts and minds of the
developers (or, in some cases, their employers). It can't be
negotiated out of existence. Even of the likes of Michael and Florian
*wanted* to negotiate it out of existence, they can't speak for all
the contributors. They aren't even legally an entity, after all. It
can be a polite battle, or an ugly one, but it can't, in my opinion,
be defined out of existence.
If/when we launch the podling, we'll be starting an experiment. At the
end of that experiment, one, two, or zero open office projects will
have a critical mass of developers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: OOo - Lines in the sand and pre-determined conclusions...
Posted by Greg Stein <gs...@gmail.com>.
On Fri, Jun 3, 2011 at 16:50, Cor Nouws <oo...@nouenoff.nl> wrote:
>...
> Jim Jagielski wrote (03-06-11 22:14)
>>
>> Posts such as:
>>
>>
>> http://itmanagement.earthweb.com/osrc/article.php/3935136/LibreOffice-340-Released-as-OpenOffice-Heads-to-Apache.htm
>>
>> certainly don't help. It just reinforces a perceived division
>> as well as almost forcing the "other side" to take a defensive
>> stance.
>>
>> It's a shame.
>
> I do not understand why that should be a shame.
The article portrays Michael as a spokesperson for the LibreOffice
community. And then Michael proceeds to denigrate the effort here. It
is fine for individuals to have opinions, but when it starts to get
portrayed at a community level... well. Not so nice.
-g
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: OOo - Lines in the sand and pre-determined conclusions...
Posted by Cor Nouws <oo...@nouenoff.nl>.
Hi Jim, all,
<short intro>
Long time OpenOffice.org contributor in various areas. Mainly
LibreOffice since Sept. 2010. One of the founders there.
Now looking at a Thinderbird folder with more than 300 mails, of which
I've only read a few up until now :-)
Living in The Netherlands, so If I skip in an hour or so, it is because
of the time zone ;-)
</short intro>
Jim Jagielski wrote (03-06-11 22:14)
> Posts such as:
>
> http://itmanagement.earthweb.com/osrc/article.php/3935136/LibreOffice-340-Released-as-OpenOffice-Heads-to-Apache.htm
>
> certainly don't help. It just reinforces a perceived division
> as well as almost forcing the "other side" to take a defensive
> stance.
>
> It's a shame.
I do not understand why that should be a shame.
All I read is explanation of the situation, among which implicitly an
important difference: the copy-left versus non copy-left. That is a
personal style, choice that is one of the reasons d'être of LibreOffice.
Indeed a line in the sand. But putting ones head in the sand, by not
acknowledging it, would make little sense IMO.
Kind regards,
Cor
--
- http://nl.libreoffice.org
- giving openoffice.org its foundation :: The Document Foundation -
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: OOo - Lines in the sand and pre-determined conclusions...
Posted by Simon Phipps <si...@webmink.com>.
On 3 Jun 2011, at 21:14, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> Posts such as:
>
> http://itmanagement.earthweb.com/osrc/article.php/3935136/LibreOffice-340-Released-as-OpenOffice-Heads-to-Apache.htm
>
> certainly don't help. It just reinforces a perceived division
> as well as almost forcing the "other side" to take a defensive
> stance.
>
> It's a shame.
Looks like a journalist writing a story about LO's 3.4 releaser to me. They like to stir, you know :-)
S.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org