You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@openoffice.apache.org by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> on 2011/08/20 22:00:49 UTC
Re: [email] RE: [Discuss] ASF hosted openoffice.org email service
[Was: Re: [Discussion] dev@openoffice.org]
On Sat, Aug 20, 2011 at 3:47 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton
<de...@acm.org> wrote:
> I'm concerned that we are still conflating two different problems.
>
> 1. One has to do with name@openoffice.org where this is a personal forwarding set up for some user (or entity) and it forwards to another e-mail address. If these are preserved, forwarding them to some other email address to then be forwarded to the original entity does not make a lot of sense. The issue here is that the entity is known by that email address and has connections that access that entity by that email address.
> It is a good idea to preserve that service so that the entities that have use of the individual ones can somehow manage their forwarding. I would not want to figure out how to retire it until later, and with considerable warning. Having an individual's e-mail address disappear is not a pleasant experience.
>
I agree that it is very convenient to have a permanent email
forwarding service provided at no cost by a third party. But I'm not
seeing how this fits within the ASF's organizational mission. How
does this help us develop and publish open source software?
-Rob
Re: [email] RE: [Discuss] ASF hosted openoffice.org email service
[Was: Re: [Discussion] dev@openoffice.org]
Posted by RGB ES <rg...@gmail.com>.
2011/8/21 Shane Curcuru <as...@shanecurcuru.org>:
> On 8/21/2011 1:09 PM, RGB ES wrote:
> ...snip...
>
>> I also think that the problem with existing mailing list is more
>> profound than the "to aliases or not to aliases": we cannot ask all
>> the contributors on all OOo related mailing lists to come here if not
>> for other reason because of the language. For instance, very valuable
>> persons on both, the Spanish and Italian forums will never be able to
>> survive to 60+ *full English* mails a day.
>> Cheers
>> Ricardo
>
> Note that IMO a careful selection of language specific lists for users and
> user support is something I think would be good to continue to maintain.
> The language issue for users (not developers as much) is important, and
> supporting that is something that a number of other Apache projects do
> implement.
>
> But for developer focused lists and other lists where the community actually
> works on the project; in that case, I would tend to having a single list
> instead of per-language lists. Each time you separate lists for regular
> contributors (people who actually work on code/docs/extensions, etc.), you
> separate the community to a degree.
>
> Just my suggestions to think about
>
> - Shane
>
Sure: as few lists as possible, but not fewer than needed.
Cheers
Ricardo
Re: [email] RE: [Discuss] ASF hosted openoffice.org email service
[Was: Re: [Discussion] dev@openoffice.org]
Posted by Shane Curcuru <as...@shanecurcuru.org>.
On 8/21/2011 1:09 PM, RGB ES wrote:
...snip...
> I also think that the problem with existing mailing list is more
> profound than the "to aliases or not to aliases": we cannot ask all
> the contributors on all OOo related mailing lists to come here if not
> for other reason because of the language. For instance, very valuable
> persons on both, the Spanish and Italian forums will never be able to
> survive to 60+ *full English* mails a day.
> Cheers
> Ricardo
Note that IMO a careful selection of language specific lists for users
and user support is something I think would be good to continue to
maintain. The language issue for users (not developers as much) is
important, and supporting that is something that a number of other
Apache projects do implement.
But for developer focused lists and other lists where the community
actually works on the project; in that case, I would tend to having a
single list instead of per-language lists. Each time you separate lists
for regular contributors (people who actually work on
code/docs/extensions, etc.), you separate the community to a degree.
Just my suggestions to think about
- Shane
Re: [email] RE: [Discuss] ASF hosted openoffice.org email service
[Was: Re: [Discussion] dev@openoffice.org]
Posted by RGB ES <rg...@gmail.com>.
2011/8/21 Rob Weir <ap...@robweir.com>:
> On Sun, Aug 21, 2011 at 11:25 AM, Terry Ellison <te...@apache.org> wrote:
>> On 21/08/11 15:18, Rob Weir wrote:
>>>
>>> On Sun, Aug 21, 2011 at 5:21 AM, Terry Ellison <te...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 20/08/11 21:00, Rob Weir wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sat, Aug 20, 2011 at 3:47 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 1. One has to do with name@openoffice.org where this is a personal
>>>>>> forwarding set up for some user (or entity) and it forwards to another
>>>>>> e-mail address. If these are preserved, forwarding them to some other
>>>>>> email
>>>>>> address to then be forwarded to the original entity does not make a lot
>>>>>> of
>>>>>> sense. The issue here is that the entity is known by that email
>>>>>> address and
>>>>>> has connections that access that entity by that email address.
>>>>>> It is a good idea to preserve that service so that the entities that
>>>>>> have use of the individual ones can somehow manage their forwarding. I
>>>>>> would not want to figure out how to retire it until later, and with
>>>>>> considerable warning. Having an individual's e-mail address disappear
>>>>>> is
>>>>>> not a pleasant experience.
>>>>>>
>>>>> ... How does this help us develop and publish open source software? ...
>>>>>
>>>> There seems little point in developing any FLOSS package which doesn't
>>>> meet
>>>> the needs of its user population, as we will end up with an unused
>>>> product.
>>>
>>> Sure. But we do see other open source end user productivity
>>> applications produced without the use a wide-open email forwarding
>>> service, e.g., KOffice, AbiWord, LibreOffice. I'd even included
>>> end-user oriented Linux distros and other apps like Firefox,
>>> Thunderbird, etc. So the email forwarder is not essential to
>>> success.
>>>
>>> In some cases, email addresses were made selectively available. For
>>> example, KDE makes them available to only core contributors, as
>>> explained here:
>>>
>>> "I am sorry but in the past, people misused their KDE email address to
>>> tell
>>> nonsence about KDE and of course people thought that it was the official
>>> KDE
>>> position, as they had a @kde.org address. Unfortunately, it has not only
>>> happened once. That is why there is now the restrictive policy about KDE
>>> email addresses."
>>>
>>> http://lists.kde.org/?l=kde-www&m=106902943009944&w=2
>>>
>>> Apache has a similar policy, and makes the email address available
>>> only to project committers.
>>>
>>>> I repeat that OpenOffice.org targets the general PC-owning population
>>>> as
>>>> its user-base. This is very different to Apache Server, Traffic Server,
>>>> Subversion and the other Apache projects that typically have a niche IT
>>>> proficient and often IT professional user population. Clearly, the
>>>> success
>>>> of any FLOSS package depends on the support of a committed core of able
>>>> developers. However, the success of OOo also depends on a wide community
>>>> of
>>>> contributors, documentation and tutorial developers, community supporter
>>>> and
>>>> even just power-users who can evangelise the product.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Every person and every project wants to think that it is special, that
>>> it is different from all others. OK. That's fine. But let's not
>>> overstate the differences.
>>>
>>> Remember, Subversion has an awesome book [1], Apache has great
>>> tutorials [2], etc. They manage, somehow, even lacking thousands of
>>> evangelists with subversion.org email addresses.
>>>
>>> [1] http://svnbook.red-bean.com/
>>> [2] http://httpd.apache.org/docs/current/
>>>
>>> OOo is not special because it has documentation and tutorials.
>>>
>>>> We have historically encouraged this community to use their oo.o
>>>> mailboxes
>>>> to foster a sense of identity. I know that I used to use my
>>>> TerryE@openoffice.org address a lot: answering end-user emails and as my
>>>> email address for a range of forums, wikis and similar services. I was
>>>> and
>>>
>>> As I understand it, these addresses were given out freely to those who
>>> registered for Bugzilla. But I also see hundreds of Viagra spam notes
>>> in OOo Bugzilla. Do you see even the slightest risk here? The self
>>> identity of the volunteers is important. But so is the identity of
>>> the project, including the integrity of the trademark. It should
>>> never be ambiguous whether someone is speaking on behalf of the
>>> project. "Hats" at Apache are very important. We should not be
>>> giving out thousands of hats that suggest someone is an official
>>> representative of the project.
>>>
>>> If we're looking for ways to indicate support and promotion of the
>>> project, this can be done in many ways, from banners people can put on
>>> their websites and blogs, to email signature blocks.
>>>
>>> (IMHO, we also should all start being proud about being an Apache
>>> project and having an Apache email address. )
>>>
>>>> am proud to be associated with this project. However, because I realise
>>>> that the address might go away, I had to trawl through my emails to work
>>>> out
>>>> which services I had subscribed to using TerryE@oo.o and rehook them to
>>>> another mailbox: a real pain -- but less painful than suddenly finding
>>>> out
>>>> that I had become disconnected from them. So my answer is that
>>>> alienating
>>>> our extended community of supporters would not be something that we
>>>> should
>>>> do lightly. OOo depends on their support.
>>>>
>>>
>>> If we just pulled the plug, that would certainly be alienating. I
>>> agree with you there. But I still don't see these forwarding
>>> addresses as being beneficial to the project. Aside from avoiding
>>> offending the volunteers, you haven't shown why they are a benefit to
>>> the project.
>>>
>>> If Sun had sent a fruitcake to every volunteer at Christmas before,
>>> I'm sure we'd have people offended if we stopped doing that. But that
>>> does not make a fruitcake delivery service an essential part of the
>>> project administration.
>>>
>>> Ideally we never need to migrate the forwarding service. We keep it
>>> running on Oracle's servers as long as we can, and when they are shut
>>> down, the forwarding is shut down. But we need a good sense of how
>>> long that will be so we can give the users fair notice that the
>>> service will be ended.
>>>
>>> We also should figure out which addresses were used as official
>>> project addresses, for requesting or reporting information, like
>>> security vulnerabilities, etc. The set of official addresses should
>>> be treated specially and likely will require forwarding longer term,
>>> either to ooo-dev, ooo-private or ooo-security, as appropriate.
>>>
>> Your svn and Apache (server) response just emphasises our disconnect. OOo
>> is aimed at normal mortals who don't even know what a command prompt is.
>> Could you imagine you grandfather, mother or young child wanting to use
>> either of these? Fruitcakes and viagra spam on a website are irrelevant to
>> the continuance of a mail forwarding service. Your last point is that we
>> need a migration / mitigation plan. On that point +1
>>
>
> I agree it there is a disconnect. But I still think you are making a
> false distinction. The difference between end-user and developer or
> admin software is in *what* is created. It is not necessarily a
> difference in *how* it is created. I've worked over 20 years on both
> kinds of software, open source and proprietary, end user, developer
> and admin, and they are not developed differently. A quicksort is a
> quicksort, regardless of whether it is on your iPhone on your server
> or on the International Space Station. Usability testing is the same
> whether you are are testing an enterprise system monitoring product or
> a children's game. Technical writing is the same everywhere. You
> make assumptions about your audience and you target that background
> and skill level.
>
> I acknowledge that the OpenOffice software is different than
> Subversion or Apache server. (At least parts of it -- but we do have
> developer modules, UNO API, etc.) But I think that difference has
> few implications for how the project is run. In other words, the
> argument "OpenOffice is different so we need to do it the same way we
> always did it", is not really a well-founded argument at all.
> Prefacing an assertion with "The Community will be offended if we
> change" is similarly not an argument. Obviously a significant part of
> "the Community" was offended by OpenOffice.org not changing enough,
> and they went to LibreOffice. I think in both cases we need to be
> forward-looking and ask what will best grow the community growing
> forward, preferably a community that is comfortable working at Apache
> and ideally is not quite so easily offended.
>
>> I think this issue of the extended OOo community merits a thread in its own
>> right. Regards Terry
>>
>
Hello to all,
I'm monitoring the list since a while but never wrote before so
please, forgive me for entering the discussion on this conflictive
point ;) (1)
I certainly do not have the experience of you on software development,
but I think that there is a point you are missing here: even if
software development/managing/testing/whatever is almost the same game
on every software project, software *usage* could be quite different
depending on the product. People who use a web server or a svn tool
have a *high* technical profile while people using a word processor or
a presentation tool do not.
I know of people writing complex documents and with the ability to
perfectly explain you how to properly use the program that enters in
panic just because an unlucky keyboard combination switched their
keyboard layout... We need to be very carefully about what we are
asking them to do in order to remain "connected".
I also think that the problem with existing mailing list is more
profound than the "to aliases or not to aliases": we cannot ask all
the contributors on all OOo related mailing lists to come here if not
for other reason because of the language. For instance, very valuable
persons on both, the Spanish and Italian forums will never be able to
survive to 60+ *full English* mails a day.
Cheers
Ricardo
(1) Presenting myself: I'm one of the admins of the Spanish Community
forums, but also participate as volunteer on the English and Italian
forums. You'll see me as RGB on the English forum and as RGB-<two
character locale indicator> on the other two ;)
Re: [email] RE: [Discuss] ASF hosted openoffice.org email service
[Was: Re: [Discussion] dev@openoffice.org]
Posted by Rob Weir <ap...@robweir.com>.
On Sun, Aug 21, 2011 at 12:31 PM, Terry Ellison <Te...@ellisons.org.uk> wrote:
> <snip>
>>>
>>> Your svn and Apache (server) response just emphasises our disconnect.
>>> OOo
>>> is aimed at normal mortals who don't even know what a command prompt is.
>>> Could you imagine you grandfather, mother or young child wanting to use
>>> either of these? Fruitcakes and viagra spam on a website are irrelevant
>>> to
>>> the continuance of a mail forwarding service. Your last point is that we
>>> need a migration / mitigation plan. On that point +1
>>>
>>
>> I agree it there is a disconnect. But I still think you are making a
>> false distinction. The difference between end-user and developer or
>> admin software is in *what* is created. It is not necessarily a
>> difference in *how* it is created. I've worked over 20 years on both
>> kinds of software, open source and proprietary, end user, developer
>> and admin, and they are not developed differently. A quicksort is a
>> quicksort, regardless of whether it is on your iPhone on your server
>> or on the International Space Station. Usability testing is the same
>> whether you are are testing an enterprise system monitoring product or
>> a children's game. Technical writing is the same everywhere. You
>> make assumptions about your audience and you target that background
>> and skill level.
>>
>> I acknowledge that the OpenOffice software is different than
>> Subversion or Apache server. (At least parts of it -- but we do have
>> developer modules, UNO API, etc.) But I think that difference has
>> few implications for how the project is run. In other words, the
>> argument "OpenOffice is different so we need to do it the same way we
>> always did it", is not really a well-founded argument at all.
>> Prefacing an assertion with "The Community will be offended if we
>> change" is similarly not an argument. Obviously a significant part of
>> "the Community" was offended by OpenOffice.org not changing enough,
>> and they went to LibreOffice. I think in both cases we need to be
>> forward-looking and ask what will best grow the community growing
>> forward, preferably a community that is comfortable working at Apache
>> and ideally is not quite so easily offended.
>>
> Siggghhhh. I didn't -- and I don't think that I have ever -- said
> "OpenOffice is different, so we need to do it the same way we always did
> it". Please don't put these words in my mouth. My point was that a product
> with this breadth of functionality and targeted at a Jo-Bloe-end-user
> community does have different support characteristics from most products
> that Apache has nurtured; we should al least consider the continuity impacts
> if we decide to curtail any existing support service, and mitigate them
> where appropriate.
>
Support via users lists and forums occurs for all sorts of projects,
end user, developer, admin, whatever. I don't see a difference there
with OOo.
In any case, I don't see what support has to do with an email
forwarding service. Support should be done openly/transparently on
user lists and the support forums. Everything at Apache is done
openly, except for very limited exceptions, like security
vulnerability reporting.
I'll repeat my original comment:
I agree that it is very convenient to have a permanent email
forwarding service provided at no cost by a third party. But I'm not
seeing how this fits within the ASF's organizational mission. How
does this help us develop and publish open source software?
Certainly it might be seen as a mark of distinction. Similarly, being
title "Project Lead of X", or "Member of Engineering Steering
Committee" or "Deputy to the Community Council" are marks of
distinction. OOo as a project was loaded with such titles, a complex
hierarchy of power blocs. Apache projects typical don't work that
way, and I'm not eager to reinterpret that kind of project structure
at Apache.
One of the first things I was told at Apache was not to use your
ibm.com email address. As a committer, you are and individual working
on the project. You don't bring along your corporate title. I think
this is important. But I also think we need to avoid bringing along
legacy OOo titles as well. And this includes the distinction between
legacy project members and new project members. Just as I should not
be assuming any prerogatives from working for IBM, I don't think
anyone else should assume the same for being a legacy project
contributor. I'd like to avoid having this false status symbol of an
openoffice.org email address perpetuated in this Apache project.
OpenOffice.org is the trademarked name of the product. It is not
something we should be allowing thousands of people to use in private
commerce without accountability.
-Rob
Re: [email] RE: [Discuss] ASF hosted openoffice.org email service
[Was: Re: [Discussion] dev@openoffice.org]
Posted by Terry Ellison <Te...@ellisons.org.uk>.
<snip>
>> Your svn and Apache (server) response just emphasises our disconnect.
>> OOo
>> is aimed at normal mortals who don't even know what a command prompt is.
>> Could you imagine you grandfather, mother or young child wanting to use
>> either of these? Fruitcakes and viagra spam on a website are
>> irrelevant to
>> the continuance of a mail forwarding service. Your last point is that we
>> need a migration / mitigation plan. On that point +1
>>
>
> I agree it there is a disconnect. But I still think you are making a
> false distinction. The difference between end-user and developer or
> admin software is in *what* is created. It is not necessarily a
> difference in *how* it is created. I've worked over 20 years on both
> kinds of software, open source and proprietary, end user, developer
> and admin, and they are not developed differently. A quicksort is a
> quicksort, regardless of whether it is on your iPhone on your server
> or on the International Space Station. Usability testing is the same
> whether you are are testing an enterprise system monitoring product or
> a children's game. Technical writing is the same everywhere. You
> make assumptions about your audience and you target that background
> and skill level.
>
> I acknowledge that the OpenOffice software is different than
> Subversion or Apache server. (At least parts of it -- but we do have
> developer modules, UNO API, etc.) But I think that difference has
> few implications for how the project is run. In other words, the
> argument "OpenOffice is different so we need to do it the same way we
> always did it", is not really a well-founded argument at all.
> Prefacing an assertion with "The Community will be offended if we
> change" is similarly not an argument. Obviously a significant part of
> "the Community" was offended by OpenOffice.org not changing enough,
> and they went to LibreOffice. I think in both cases we need to be
> forward-looking and ask what will best grow the community growing
> forward, preferably a community that is comfortable working at Apache
> and ideally is not quite so easily offended.
>
Siggghhhh. I didn't -- and I don't think that I have ever -- said
"OpenOffice is different, so we need to do it the same way we always did
it". Please don't put these words in my mouth. My point was that a
product with this breadth of functionality and targeted at a
Jo-Bloe-end-user community does have different support characteristics
from most products that Apache has nurtured; we should al least consider
the continuity impacts if we decide to curtail any existing support
service, and mitigate them where appropriate.
After my 20 years in software development, I then spent the next 10+ on
taking over accounts, handing them over, and dealing with messes that
some account execs create. I want to avoid seeing this project go the
way of some failures that I've witnessed. Somehow we need to get past
this storming, and work towards building consensus and generating solid
achievement.
Regards Terry
Re: [email] RE: [Discuss] ASF hosted openoffice.org email service
[Was: Re: [Discussion] dev@openoffice.org]
Posted by Rob Weir <ap...@robweir.com>.
On Sun, Aug 21, 2011 at 11:25 AM, Terry Ellison <te...@apache.org> wrote:
> On 21/08/11 15:18, Rob Weir wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, Aug 21, 2011 at 5:21 AM, Terry Ellison <te...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 20/08/11 21:00, Rob Weir wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, Aug 20, 2011 at 3:47 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton
>>>>>
>>>>> 1. One has to do with name@openoffice.org where this is a personal
>>>>> forwarding set up for some user (or entity) and it forwards to another
>>>>> e-mail address. If these are preserved, forwarding them to some other
>>>>> email
>>>>> address to then be forwarded to the original entity does not make a lot
>>>>> of
>>>>> sense. The issue here is that the entity is known by that email
>>>>> address and
>>>>> has connections that access that entity by that email address.
>>>>> It is a good idea to preserve that service so that the entities that
>>>>> have use of the individual ones can somehow manage their forwarding. I
>>>>> would not want to figure out how to retire it until later, and with
>>>>> considerable warning. Having an individual's e-mail address disappear
>>>>> is
>>>>> not a pleasant experience.
>>>>>
>>>> ... How does this help us develop and publish open source software? ...
>>>>
>>> There seems little point in developing any FLOSS package which doesn't
>>> meet
>>> the needs of its user population, as we will end up with an unused
>>> product.
>>
>> Sure. But we do see other open source end user productivity
>> applications produced without the use a wide-open email forwarding
>> service, e.g., KOffice, AbiWord, LibreOffice. I'd even included
>> end-user oriented Linux distros and other apps like Firefox,
>> Thunderbird, etc. So the email forwarder is not essential to
>> success.
>>
>> In some cases, email addresses were made selectively available. For
>> example, KDE makes them available to only core contributors, as
>> explained here:
>>
>> "I am sorry but in the past, people misused their KDE email address to
>> tell
>> nonsence about KDE and of course people thought that it was the official
>> KDE
>> position, as they had a @kde.org address. Unfortunately, it has not only
>> happened once. That is why there is now the restrictive policy about KDE
>> email addresses."
>>
>> http://lists.kde.org/?l=kde-www&m=106902943009944&w=2
>>
>> Apache has a similar policy, and makes the email address available
>> only to project committers.
>>
>>> I repeat that OpenOffice.org targets the general PC-owning population
>>> as
>>> its user-base. This is very different to Apache Server, Traffic Server,
>>> Subversion and the other Apache projects that typically have a niche IT
>>> proficient and often IT professional user population. Clearly, the
>>> success
>>> of any FLOSS package depends on the support of a committed core of able
>>> developers. However, the success of OOo also depends on a wide community
>>> of
>>> contributors, documentation and tutorial developers, community supporter
>>> and
>>> even just power-users who can evangelise the product.
>>>
>>
>> Every person and every project wants to think that it is special, that
>> it is different from all others. OK. That's fine. But let's not
>> overstate the differences.
>>
>> Remember, Subversion has an awesome book [1], Apache has great
>> tutorials [2], etc. They manage, somehow, even lacking thousands of
>> evangelists with subversion.org email addresses.
>>
>> [1] http://svnbook.red-bean.com/
>> [2] http://httpd.apache.org/docs/current/
>>
>> OOo is not special because it has documentation and tutorials.
>>
>>> We have historically encouraged this community to use their oo.o
>>> mailboxes
>>> to foster a sense of identity. I know that I used to use my
>>> TerryE@openoffice.org address a lot: answering end-user emails and as my
>>> email address for a range of forums, wikis and similar services. I was
>>> and
>>
>> As I understand it, these addresses were given out freely to those who
>> registered for Bugzilla. But I also see hundreds of Viagra spam notes
>> in OOo Bugzilla. Do you see even the slightest risk here? The self
>> identity of the volunteers is important. But so is the identity of
>> the project, including the integrity of the trademark. It should
>> never be ambiguous whether someone is speaking on behalf of the
>> project. "Hats" at Apache are very important. We should not be
>> giving out thousands of hats that suggest someone is an official
>> representative of the project.
>>
>> If we're looking for ways to indicate support and promotion of the
>> project, this can be done in many ways, from banners people can put on
>> their websites and blogs, to email signature blocks.
>>
>> (IMHO, we also should all start being proud about being an Apache
>> project and having an Apache email address. )
>>
>>> am proud to be associated with this project. However, because I realise
>>> that the address might go away, I had to trawl through my emails to work
>>> out
>>> which services I had subscribed to using TerryE@oo.o and rehook them to
>>> another mailbox: a real pain -- but less painful than suddenly finding
>>> out
>>> that I had become disconnected from them. So my answer is that
>>> alienating
>>> our extended community of supporters would not be something that we
>>> should
>>> do lightly. OOo depends on their support.
>>>
>>
>> If we just pulled the plug, that would certainly be alienating. I
>> agree with you there. But I still don't see these forwarding
>> addresses as being beneficial to the project. Aside from avoiding
>> offending the volunteers, you haven't shown why they are a benefit to
>> the project.
>>
>> If Sun had sent a fruitcake to every volunteer at Christmas before,
>> I'm sure we'd have people offended if we stopped doing that. But that
>> does not make a fruitcake delivery service an essential part of the
>> project administration.
>>
>> Ideally we never need to migrate the forwarding service. We keep it
>> running on Oracle's servers as long as we can, and when they are shut
>> down, the forwarding is shut down. But we need a good sense of how
>> long that will be so we can give the users fair notice that the
>> service will be ended.
>>
>> We also should figure out which addresses were used as official
>> project addresses, for requesting or reporting information, like
>> security vulnerabilities, etc. The set of official addresses should
>> be treated specially and likely will require forwarding longer term,
>> either to ooo-dev, ooo-private or ooo-security, as appropriate.
>>
> Your svn and Apache (server) response just emphasises our disconnect. OOo
> is aimed at normal mortals who don't even know what a command prompt is.
> Could you imagine you grandfather, mother or young child wanting to use
> either of these? Fruitcakes and viagra spam on a website are irrelevant to
> the continuance of a mail forwarding service. Your last point is that we
> need a migration / mitigation plan. On that point +1
>
I agree it there is a disconnect. But I still think you are making a
false distinction. The difference between end-user and developer or
admin software is in *what* is created. It is not necessarily a
difference in *how* it is created. I've worked over 20 years on both
kinds of software, open source and proprietary, end user, developer
and admin, and they are not developed differently. A quicksort is a
quicksort, regardless of whether it is on your iPhone on your server
or on the International Space Station. Usability testing is the same
whether you are are testing an enterprise system monitoring product or
a children's game. Technical writing is the same everywhere. You
make assumptions about your audience and you target that background
and skill level.
I acknowledge that the OpenOffice software is different than
Subversion or Apache server. (At least parts of it -- but we do have
developer modules, UNO API, etc.) But I think that difference has
few implications for how the project is run. In other words, the
argument "OpenOffice is different so we need to do it the same way we
always did it", is not really a well-founded argument at all.
Prefacing an assertion with "The Community will be offended if we
change" is similarly not an argument. Obviously a significant part of
"the Community" was offended by OpenOffice.org not changing enough,
and they went to LibreOffice. I think in both cases we need to be
forward-looking and ask what will best grow the community growing
forward, preferably a community that is comfortable working at Apache
and ideally is not quite so easily offended.
> I think this issue of the extended OOo community merits a thread in its own
> right. Regards Terry
>
Re: [email] RE: [Discuss] ASF hosted openoffice.org email service
[Was: Re: [Discussion] dev@openoffice.org]
Posted by Terry Ellison <te...@apache.org>.
On 21/08/11 15:18, Rob Weir wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 21, 2011 at 5:21 AM, Terry Ellison <te...@apache.org> wrote:
>> On 20/08/11 21:00, Rob Weir wrote:
>>>
>>> On Sat, Aug 20, 2011 at 3:47 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton
>>>>
>>>> 1. One has to do with name@openoffice.org where this is a personal
>>>> forwarding set up for some user (or entity) and it forwards to another
>>>> e-mail address. If these are preserved, forwarding them to some
>>>> other email
>>>> address to then be forwarded to the original entity does not make a
>>>> lot of
>>>> sense. The issue here is that the entity is known by that email
>>>> address and
>>>> has connections that access that entity by that email address.
>>>> It is a good idea to preserve that service so that the entities that
>>>> have use of the individual ones can somehow manage their forwarding. I
>>>> would not want to figure out how to retire it until later, and with
>>>> considerable warning. Having an individual's e-mail address
>>>> disappear is
>>>> not a pleasant experience.
>>>>
>>> ... How does this help us develop and publish open source software? ...
>>>
>> There seems little point in developing any FLOSS package which
>> doesn't meet
>> the needs of its user population, as we will end up with an unused
>> product.
>
> Sure. But we do see other open source end user productivity
> applications produced without the use a wide-open email forwarding
> service, e.g., KOffice, AbiWord, LibreOffice. I'd even included
> end-user oriented Linux distros and other apps like Firefox,
> Thunderbird, etc. So the email forwarder is not essential to
> success.
>
> In some cases, email addresses were made selectively available. For
> example, KDE makes them available to only core contributors, as
> explained here:
>
> "I am sorry but in the past, people misused their KDE email address to
> tell
> nonsence about KDE and of course people thought that it was the
> official KDE
> position, as they had a @kde.org address. Unfortunately, it has not only
> happened once. That is why there is now the restrictive policy about KDE
> email addresses."
>
> http://lists.kde.org/?l=kde-www&m=106902943009944&w=2
>
> Apache has a similar policy, and makes the email address available
> only to project committers.
>
>> I repeat that OpenOffice.org targets the general PC-owning
>> population as
>> its user-base. This is very different to Apache Server, Traffic Server,
>> Subversion and the other Apache projects that typically have a niche IT
>> proficient and often IT professional user population. Clearly, the
>> success
>> of any FLOSS package depends on the support of a committed core of able
>> developers. However, the success of OOo also depends on a wide
>> community of
>> contributors, documentation and tutorial developers, community
>> supporter and
>> even just power-users who can evangelise the product.
>>
>
> Every person and every project wants to think that it is special, that
> it is different from all others. OK. That's fine. But let's not
> overstate the differences.
>
> Remember, Subversion has an awesome book [1], Apache has great
> tutorials [2], etc. They manage, somehow, even lacking thousands of
> evangelists with subversion.org email addresses.
>
> [1] http://svnbook.red-bean.com/
> [2] http://httpd.apache.org/docs/current/
>
> OOo is not special because it has documentation and tutorials.
>
>> We have historically encouraged this community to use their oo.o
>> mailboxes
>> to foster a sense of identity. I know that I used to use my
>> TerryE@openoffice.org address a lot: answering end-user emails and as my
>> email address for a range of forums, wikis and similar services. I
>> was and
>
> As I understand it, these addresses were given out freely to those who
> registered for Bugzilla. But I also see hundreds of Viagra spam notes
> in OOo Bugzilla. Do you see even the slightest risk here? The self
> identity of the volunteers is important. But so is the identity of
> the project, including the integrity of the trademark. It should
> never be ambiguous whether someone is speaking on behalf of the
> project. "Hats" at Apache are very important. We should not be
> giving out thousands of hats that suggest someone is an official
> representative of the project.
>
> If we're looking for ways to indicate support and promotion of the
> project, this can be done in many ways, from banners people can put on
> their websites and blogs, to email signature blocks.
>
> (IMHO, we also should all start being proud about being an Apache
> project and having an Apache email address. )
>
>> am proud to be associated with this project. However, because I realise
>> that the address might go away, I had to trawl through my emails to
>> work out
>> which services I had subscribed to using TerryE@oo.o and rehook them to
>> another mailbox: a real pain -- but less painful than suddenly
>> finding out
>> that I had become disconnected from them. So my answer is that
>> alienating
>> our extended community of supporters would not be something that we
>> should
>> do lightly. OOo depends on their support.
>>
>
> If we just pulled the plug, that would certainly be alienating. I
> agree with you there. But I still don't see these forwarding
> addresses as being beneficial to the project. Aside from avoiding
> offending the volunteers, you haven't shown why they are a benefit to
> the project.
>
> If Sun had sent a fruitcake to every volunteer at Christmas before,
> I'm sure we'd have people offended if we stopped doing that. But that
> does not make a fruitcake delivery service an essential part of the
> project administration.
>
> Ideally we never need to migrate the forwarding service. We keep it
> running on Oracle's servers as long as we can, and when they are shut
> down, the forwarding is shut down. But we need a good sense of how
> long that will be so we can give the users fair notice that the
> service will be ended.
>
> We also should figure out which addresses were used as official
> project addresses, for requesting or reporting information, like
> security vulnerabilities, etc. The set of official addresses should
> be treated specially and likely will require forwarding longer term,
> either to ooo-dev, ooo-private or ooo-security, as appropriate.
>
Your svn and Apache (server) response just emphasises our disconnect.
OOo is aimed at normal mortals who don't even know what a command prompt
is. Could you imagine you grandfather, mother or young child wanting to
use either of these? Fruitcakes and viagra spam on a website are
irrelevant to the continuance of a mail forwarding service. Your last
point is that we need a migration / mitigation plan. On that point +1
I think this issue of the extended OOo community merits a thread in its
own right. Regards Terry
Re: [email] RE: [Discuss] ASF hosted openoffice.org email service
[Was: Re: [Discussion] dev@openoffice.org]
Posted by Rob Weir <ap...@robweir.com>.
On Sun, Aug 21, 2011 at 5:21 AM, Terry Ellison <te...@apache.org> wrote:
> On 20/08/11 21:00, Rob Weir wrote:
>>
>> On Sat, Aug 20, 2011 at 3:47 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton
>>>
>>> 1. One has to do with name@openoffice.org where this is a personal
>>> forwarding set up for some user (or entity) and it forwards to another
>>> e-mail address. If these are preserved, forwarding them to some other email
>>> address to then be forwarded to the original entity does not make a lot of
>>> sense. The issue here is that the entity is known by that email address and
>>> has connections that access that entity by that email address.
>>> It is a good idea to preserve that service so that the entities that
>>> have use of the individual ones can somehow manage their forwarding. I
>>> would not want to figure out how to retire it until later, and with
>>> considerable warning. Having an individual's e-mail address disappear is
>>> not a pleasant experience.
>>>
>> ... How does this help us develop and publish open source software? ...
>>
> There seems little point in developing any FLOSS package which doesn't meet
> the needs of its user population, as we will end up with an unused product.
Sure. But we do see other open source end user productivity
applications produced without the use a wide-open email forwarding
service, e.g., KOffice, AbiWord, LibreOffice. I'd even included
end-user oriented Linux distros and other apps like Firefox,
Thunderbird, etc. So the email forwarder is not essential to
success.
In some cases, email addresses were made selectively available. For
example, KDE makes them available to only core contributors, as
explained here:
"I am sorry but in the past, people misused their KDE email address to tell
nonsence about KDE and of course people thought that it was the official KDE
position, as they had a @kde.org address. Unfortunately, it has not only
happened once. That is why there is now the restrictive policy about KDE
email addresses."
http://lists.kde.org/?l=kde-www&m=106902943009944&w=2
Apache has a similar policy, and makes the email address available
only to project committers.
> I repeat that OpenOffice.org targets the general PC-owning population as
> its user-base. This is very different to Apache Server, Traffic Server,
> Subversion and the other Apache projects that typically have a niche IT
> proficient and often IT professional user population. Clearly, the success
> of any FLOSS package depends on the support of a committed core of able
> developers. However, the success of OOo also depends on a wide community of
> contributors, documentation and tutorial developers, community supporter and
> even just power-users who can evangelise the product.
>
Every person and every project wants to think that it is special, that
it is different from all others. OK. That's fine. But let's not
overstate the differences.
Remember, Subversion has an awesome book [1], Apache has great
tutorials [2], etc. They manage, somehow, even lacking thousands of
evangelists with subversion.org email addresses.
[1] http://svnbook.red-bean.com/
[2] http://httpd.apache.org/docs/current/
OOo is not special because it has documentation and tutorials.
> We have historically encouraged this community to use their oo.o mailboxes
> to foster a sense of identity. I know that I used to use my
> TerryE@openoffice.org address a lot: answering end-user emails and as my
> email address for a range of forums, wikis and similar services. I was and
As I understand it, these addresses were given out freely to those who
registered for Bugzilla. But I also see hundreds of Viagra spam notes
in OOo Bugzilla. Do you see even the slightest risk here? The self
identity of the volunteers is important. But so is the identity of
the project, including the integrity of the trademark. It should
never be ambiguous whether someone is speaking on behalf of the
project. "Hats" at Apache are very important. We should not be
giving out thousands of hats that suggest someone is an official
representative of the project.
If we're looking for ways to indicate support and promotion of the
project, this can be done in many ways, from banners people can put on
their websites and blogs, to email signature blocks.
(IMHO, we also should all start being proud about being an Apache
project and having an Apache email address. )
> am proud to be associated with this project. However, because I realise
> that the address might go away, I had to trawl through my emails to work out
> which services I had subscribed to using TerryE@oo.o and rehook them to
> another mailbox: a real pain -- but less painful than suddenly finding out
> that I had become disconnected from them. So my answer is that alienating
> our extended community of supporters would not be something that we should
> do lightly. OOo depends on their support.
>
If we just pulled the plug, that would certainly be alienating. I
agree with you there. But I still don't see these forwarding
addresses as being beneficial to the project. Aside from avoiding
offending the volunteers, you haven't shown why they are a benefit to
the project.
If Sun had sent a fruitcake to every volunteer at Christmas before,
I'm sure we'd have people offended if we stopped doing that. But that
does not make a fruitcake delivery service an essential part of the
project administration.
Ideally we never need to migrate the forwarding service. We keep it
running on Oracle's servers as long as we can, and when they are shut
down, the forwarding is shut down. But we need a good sense of how
long that will be so we can give the users fair notice that the
service will be ended.
We also should figure out which addresses were used as official
project addresses, for requesting or reporting information, like
security vulnerabilities, etc. The set of official addresses should
be treated specially and likely will require forwarding longer term,
either to ooo-dev, ooo-private or ooo-security, as appropriate.
> //Terry
>
>
Re: [email] RE: [Discuss] ASF hosted openoffice.org email service [Was: Re: [Discussion] dev@openoffice.org]
Posted by Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net>.
On Aug 21, 2011, at 8:01 AM, Terry Ellison wrote:
> Sorry, I had to reformat this thread as it was otherwise unreadable
>>>>> Clearly, the success of any FLOSS package depends on the support of a
>>>>> committed core of able developers. However, the success of OOo also
>>>>> depends on a wide community of contributors, documentation and
>>>>> tutorial developers, community supporter and even just power-users who
>>>>> can evangelise the product.
>>>>>
>>>>> We have historically encouraged this community to use their oo.o
>>>>> mailboxes to foster a sense of identity. I know that I used to use my
>>>>> TerryE@openoffice.org address a lot: answering end-user emails and as
>>>>> my email address for a range of forums, wikis and similar services. I
>>>>> was and am proud to be associated with this project. However, because
>>>>> I realise that the address might go away, I had to trawl through my
>>>>> emails to work out which services I had subscribed to using
>>>>> TerryE@oo.o and rehook them to another mailbox: a real pain -- but
>>>>> less painful than suddenly finding out that I had become disconnected
>>>>> from them. So my answer is that alienating our extended community of
>>>>> supporters would not be something that we should do lightly. OOo
>>>>> depends on their support.
>>>>
>>>> Likewise, I use it all the time, I would be strongly opposed to losing
>>>> the@oo.o redirects for all of the reasons Terry outlines. Also long term
>>>> users, (I dare say I'm not the only one) would have considerable issues tracing
>>>> every single connection that uses that email.
>>>>
>>>> Administratively and in terms of resource consumption, I don't see a big
>>>> issue leaving it as is.
>>>
>>> Are you asking Oracle to continue hosting an email service for a project
>>> they are no longer involved with?
>>>
>>> If yes, I doubt very much they will oblige.
>>
>> I wasn't asking that, previous discussion had pointed to redirecting OOo lists
>> to the Apache ooo lists
>>> If not please explain the ease in which this transfer of email accounts,
>>> mailing lists, archives, dns, integration with our systems will take place.
>>> Your one sentence makes it sound like a 5 minute job.
>>
>> I thought this was all being done in any case if only to retain connect for
>> users of legacy OOo. Many email addresses have to be retained because our
>> users are not au faix with the machinations of Oracle and Apache. Simply that
>> @openoffice.org will get them what they need in terms of support whether it be
>> users@, discuss@ or "whatever MarCon"@. That will not disappear overnight.
>>
>>
> Gavin, I don't think that anyone is asking Oracle to continue to host this. The MX record for OpenOffice.org is now assigned to ASF.
MX record is still pointing at Oracle until we decide what to do and then have time to implement it.
> I feel that we are saying that this is one of the bundle of services that comes with OOo, and we should have a continuity plan for it: either:
>
> * migrate the service or
> * consciously and deliberately decide to kill it understanding that
> this will be disruptive and send out a pretty strong message to
> the extended OOo community which uses it.
We should consider the strong likelihood that those that have heavily used their OOo email forwarders are likely to be the people we want to keep interested in the project.
I just went through changing the email that I used for over a decade. No way can people untangle everything in less than several months.
Is there consensus that over some period of time there should be no (or very, very few) individual email forwarders? If this time period is short then perhaps the Oracle MX can continue long enough. If longer then I would consider that we should start by migrating at least the significant portion of the email addresses. We can decide if significant is a number of the whole, or significant individuals.
> Yes, I see this as a migration and service provision issue, but not a major administration issue going forward because we can freeze the existing list and then go through some retirement plan over the next 12 months, say. At it's heart this is an email redirector just like XXXXX@apache.org -- albeit with a considerably longer but no static mapping list.
Exactly.
> Clearly someone has to own this, and I do think that the plan and effort for this needs to have a /project/ owner who is willing to would with the @infra team here. Maybe I will end up adding it my list if no one else comes forward, though this would require Oracle to give us some time by continuing to host the service in the short term.
I would help if there are more than you and I willing. Other volunteers?
> Though I am starting to think of the concept of committer on this "OpenOffice.org project" a bit of an oxymoron :( Terry
We have at least three types of committers.
(1) People being paid.
(2) People who are "retired".
(3) People with full time jobs.
Those in the first group need to leave time for those in groups (2) and (3). I am in group (3). I have learned to let these conversations go slower so that the word can turn :-)
Best Regards,
Dave
Re: [email] RE: [Discuss] ASF hosted openoffice.org email service
[Was: Re: [Discussion] dev@openoffice.org]
Posted by Terry Ellison <Te...@ellisons.org.uk>.
Sorry, I had to reformat this thread as it was otherwise unreadable
>>>> Clearly, the success of any FLOSS package depends on the support of a
>>>> committed core of able developers. However, the success of OOo also
>>>> depends on a wide community of contributors, documentation and
>>>> tutorial developers, community supporter and even just power-users who
>>>> can evangelise the product.
>>>>
>>>> We have historically encouraged this community to use their oo.o
>>>> mailboxes to foster a sense of identity. I know that I used to use my
>>>> TerryE@openoffice.org address a lot: answering end-user emails and as
>>>> my email address for a range of forums, wikis and similar services. I
>>>> was and am proud to be associated with this project. However, because
>>>> I realise that the address might go away, I had to trawl through my
>>>> emails to work out which services I had subscribed to using
>>>> TerryE@oo.o and rehook them to another mailbox: a real pain -- but
>>>> less painful than suddenly finding out that I had become disconnected
>>>> from them. So my answer is that alienating our extended community of
>>>> supporters would not be something that we should do lightly. OOo
>>>> depends on their support.
>>>
>>> Likewise, I use it all the time, I would be strongly opposed to losing
>>> the@oo.o redirects for all of the reasons Terry outlines. Also long term
>>> users, (I dare say I'm not the only one) would have considerable
>>> issues tracing
>>> every single connection that uses that email.
>>>
>>> Administratively and in terms of resource consumption, I don't see a big
>>> issue leaving it as is.
>>
>> Are you asking Oracle to continue hosting an email service for a project
>> they are no longer involved with?
>>
>> If yes, I doubt very much they will oblige.
>
> I wasn't asking that, previous discussion had pointed to redirecting
> OOo lists
> to the Apache ooo lists
>> If not please explain the ease in which this transfer of email accounts,
>> mailing lists, archives, dns, integration with our systems will take
>> place.
>> Your one sentence makes it sound like a 5 minute job.
>
> I thought this was all being done in any case if only to retain
> connect for
> users of legacy OOo. Many email addresses have to be retained because our
> users are not au faix with the machinations of Oracle and Apache.
> Simply that
> @openoffice.org will get them what they need in terms of support
> whether it be
> users@, discuss@ or "whatever MarCon"@. That will not disappear overnight.
>
>
Gavin, I don't think that anyone is asking Oracle to continue to host
this. The MX record for OpenOffice.org is now assigned to ASF. I feel
that we are saying that this is one of the bundle of services that comes
with OOo, and we should have a continuity plan for it: either:
* migrate the service or
* consciously and deliberately decide to kill it understanding that
this will be disruptive and send out a pretty strong message to
the extended OOo community which uses it.
Yes, I see this as a migration and service provision issue, but not a
major administration issue going forward because we can freeze the
existing list and then go through some retirement plan over the next 12
months, say. At it's heart this is an email redirector just like
XXXXX@apache.org -- albeit with a considerably longer but no static
mapping list.
Clearly someone has to own this, and I do think that the plan and effort
for this needs to have a /project/ owner who is willing to would with
the @infra team here. Maybe I will end up adding it my list if no one
else comes forward, though this would require Oracle to give us some
time by continuing to host the service in the short term.
Though I am starting to think of the concept of committer on this
"OpenOffice.org project" a bit of an oxymoron :( Terry
Re: [email] RE: [Discuss] ASF hosted openoffice.org email service
[Was: Re: [Discussion] dev@openoffice.org]
Posted by Graham Lauder <yo...@openoffice.org>.
On Monday, August 22, 2011 02:02:42 AM Gavin McDonald wrote:
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Graham Lauder [mailto:yorick_@openoffice.org]
> > Sent: Sunday, 21 August 2011 11:42 PM
> > To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
> > Cc: Terry Ellison
> > Subject: Re: [email] RE: [Discuss] ASF hosted openoffice.org email
> > service [Was: Re: [Discussion] dev@openoffice.org]
> >
> > On Sunday, August 21, 2011 09:21:51 PM Terry Ellison wrote:
> > > On 20/08/11 21:00, Rob Weir wrote:
> > > > On Sat, Aug 20, 2011 at 3:47 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton
> > > >
> > > >> 1. One has to do with name@openoffice.org where this is a personal
> > > >> forwarding set up for some user (or entity) and it forwards to
> > > >> another e-mail address. If these are preserved, forwarding them
> > > >> to some other email address to then be forwarded to the original
>
> entity
>
> > > >> does not make a lot of sense. The issue here is that the entity
> > > >> is known by that email address and has connections that access
> > > >> that entity by that email address. It is a good idea to preserve
> > > >> that service so that the entities that have use of the individual
> > > >> ones
>
> can
>
> > > >> somehow manage their forwarding. I would not want to figure out
> >
> > how
> >
> > > >> to retire it until later, and with considerable warning. Having
> > > >> an individual's e-mail address disappear is not a pleasant
> > > >> experience.
> > > >
> > > > ... How does this help us develop and publish open source software?
>
> ...
>
> > > There seems little point in developing any FLOSS package which doesn't
> > > meet the needs of its user population, as we will end up with an
> > > unused product. I repeat that OpenOffice.org targets the general
> > > PC-owning population as its user-base. This is very different to
> > > Apache Server, Traffic Server, Subversion and the other Apache
> > > projects that typically have a niche IT proficient and often IT
>
> professional
>
> > user population.
> >
> > > Clearly, the success of any FLOSS package depends on the support of a
> > > committed core of able developers. However, the success of OOo also
> > > depends on a wide community of contributors, documentation and
> > > tutorial developers, community supporter and even just power-users who
> > > can evangelise the product.
> > >
> > > We have historically encouraged this community to use their oo.o
> > > mailboxes to foster a sense of identity. I know that I used to use my
> > > TerryE@openoffice.org address a lot: answering end-user emails and as
> > > my email address for a range of forums, wikis and similar services. I
> > > was and am proud to be associated with this project. However, because
> > > I realise that the address might go away, I had to trawl through my
> > > emails to work out which services I had subscribed to using
> > > TerryE@oo.o and rehook them to another mailbox: a real pain -- but
> > > less painful than suddenly finding out that I had become disconnected
> > > from them. So my answer is that alienating our extended community of
> > > supporters would not be something that we should do lightly. OOo
> >
> > depends on their support.
> >
> > > //Terry
> >
> > Likewise, I use it all the time, I would be strongly opposed to losing
>
> the
>
> > @oo.o redirects for all of the reasons Terry outlines. Also long term
>
> users, (I
>
> > dare say I'm not the only one) would have considerable issues tracing
>
> every
>
> > single connection that uses that email.
> >
> >
> > Administratively and in terms of resource consumption, I don't see a big
>
> issue
>
> > leaving it as is.
>
> Are you asking Oracle to continue hosting an email service for a project
> they are
> no longer involved with?
>
> If yes, I doubt very much they will oblige.
I wasn't asking that, previous discussion had pointed to redirecting OOo lists
to the Apache ooo lists
>
> If not please explain the ease in which this transfer of email accounts,
> mailing lists,
> archives, dns, integration with our systems will take place. Your one
> sentence makes
> it sound like a 5 minute job.
>
> Gav...
I thought this was all being done in any case if only to retain connect for
users of legacy OOo. Many email addresses have to be retained because our
users are not au faix with the machinations of Oracle and Apache. Simply that
@openoffice.org will get them what they need in terms of support whether it be
users@, discuss@ or "whatever MarCon"@. That will not disappear overnight.
Cheers
GL
>
> > Cheers
> > GL
> >
> >
> > Graham Lauder,
> > OpenOffice.org MarCon (Marketing Contact) NZ
> > http://marketing.openoffice.org/contacts.html
RE: [email] RE: [Discuss] ASF hosted openoffice.org email service [Was: Re: [Discussion] dev@openoffice.org]
Posted by Gavin McDonald <ga...@16degrees.com.au>.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Graham Lauder [mailto:yorick_@openoffice.org]
> Sent: Sunday, 21 August 2011 11:42 PM
> To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Cc: Terry Ellison
> Subject: Re: [email] RE: [Discuss] ASF hosted openoffice.org email service
> [Was: Re: [Discussion] dev@openoffice.org]
>
> On Sunday, August 21, 2011 09:21:51 PM Terry Ellison wrote:
> > On 20/08/11 21:00, Rob Weir wrote:
> > > On Sat, Aug 20, 2011 at 3:47 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton
> > >
> > >> 1. One has to do with name@openoffice.org where this is a personal
> > >> forwarding set up for some user (or entity) and it forwards to
> > >> another e-mail address. If these are preserved, forwarding them to
> > >> some other email address to then be forwarded to the original
entity
> > >> does not make a lot of sense. The issue here is that the entity is
> > >> known by that email address and has connections that access that
> > >> entity by that email address. It is a good idea to preserve that
> > >> service so that the entities that have use of the individual ones
can
> > >> somehow manage their forwarding. I would not want to figure out
> how
> > >> to retire it until later, and with considerable warning. Having an
> > >> individual's e-mail address disappear is not a pleasant experience.
> > >
> > > ... How does this help us develop and publish open source software?
...
> >
> > There seems little point in developing any FLOSS package which doesn't
> > meet the needs of its user population, as we will end up with an
> > unused product. I repeat that OpenOffice.org targets the general
> > PC-owning population as its user-base. This is very different to
> > Apache Server, Traffic Server, Subversion and the other Apache
> > projects that typically have a niche IT proficient and often IT
professional
> user population.
> > Clearly, the success of any FLOSS package depends on the support of a
> > committed core of able developers. However, the success of OOo also
> > depends on a wide community of contributors, documentation and
> > tutorial developers, community supporter and even just power-users who
> > can evangelise the product.
> >
> > We have historically encouraged this community to use their oo.o
> > mailboxes to foster a sense of identity. I know that I used to use my
> > TerryE@openoffice.org address a lot: answering end-user emails and as
> > my email address for a range of forums, wikis and similar services. I
> > was and am proud to be associated with this project. However, because
> > I realise that the address might go away, I had to trawl through my
> > emails to work out which services I had subscribed to using
> > TerryE@oo.o and rehook them to another mailbox: a real pain -- but
> > less painful than suddenly finding out that I had become disconnected
> > from them. So my answer is that alienating our extended community of
> > supporters would not be something that we should do lightly. OOo
> depends on their support.
> >
> > //Terry
>
>
> Likewise, I use it all the time, I would be strongly opposed to losing
the
> @oo.o redirects for all of the reasons Terry outlines. Also long term
users, (I
> dare say I'm not the only one) would have considerable issues tracing
every
> single connection that uses that email.
>
> Administratively and in terms of resource consumption, I don't see a big
issue
> leaving it as is.
Are you asking Oracle to continue hosting an email service for a project
they are
no longer involved with?
If yes, I doubt very much they will oblige.
If not please explain the ease in which this transfer of email accounts,
mailing lists,
archives, dns, integration with our systems will take place. Your one
sentence makes
it sound like a 5 minute job.
Gav...
>
> Cheers
> GL
>
>
> Graham Lauder,
> OpenOffice.org MarCon (Marketing Contact) NZ
> http://marketing.openoffice.org/contacts.html
>
>
Re: [email] RE: [Discuss] ASF hosted openoffice.org email service
[Was: Re: [Discussion] dev@openoffice.org]
Posted by Graham Lauder <yo...@openoffice.org>.
On Sunday, August 21, 2011 09:21:51 PM Terry Ellison wrote:
> On 20/08/11 21:00, Rob Weir wrote:
> > On Sat, Aug 20, 2011 at 3:47 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton
> >
> >> 1. One has to do with name@openoffice.org where this is a personal
> >> forwarding set up for some user (or entity) and it forwards to
> >> another e-mail address. If these are preserved, forwarding them to
> >> some other email address to then be forwarded to the original entity
> >> does not make a lot of sense. The issue here is that the entity is
> >> known by that email address and has connections that access that
> >> entity by that email address. It is a good idea to preserve that
> >> service so that the entities that have use of the individual ones can
> >> somehow manage their forwarding. I would not want to figure out how
> >> to retire it until later, and with considerable warning. Having an
> >> individual's e-mail address disappear is not a pleasant experience.
> >
> > ... How does this help us develop and publish open source software? ...
>
> There seems little point in developing any FLOSS package which doesn't
> meet the needs of its user population, as we will end up with an unused
> product. I repeat that OpenOffice.org targets the general PC-owning
> population as its user-base. This is very different to Apache Server,
> Traffic Server, Subversion and the other Apache projects that typically
> have a niche IT proficient and often IT professional user population.
> Clearly, the success of any FLOSS package depends on the support of a
> committed core of able developers. However, the success of OOo also
> depends on a wide community of contributors, documentation and tutorial
> developers, community supporter and even just power-users who can
> evangelise the product.
>
> We have historically encouraged this community to use their oo.o
> mailboxes to foster a sense of identity. I know that I used to use my
> TerryE@openoffice.org address a lot: answering end-user emails and as my
> email address for a range of forums, wikis and similar services. I was
> and am proud to be associated with this project. However, because I
> realise that the address might go away, I had to trawl through my emails
> to work out which services I had subscribed to using TerryE@oo.o and
> rehook them to another mailbox: a real pain -- but less painful than
> suddenly finding out that I had become disconnected from them. So my
> answer is that alienating our extended community of supporters would not
> be something that we should do lightly. OOo depends on their support.
>
> //Terry
Likewise, I use it all the time, I would be strongly opposed to losing the
@oo.o redirects for all of the reasons Terry outlines. Also long term users,
(I dare say I'm not the only one) would have considerable issues tracing every
single connection that uses that email.
Administratively and in terms of resource consumption, I don't see a big issue
leaving it as is.
Cheers
GL
Graham Lauder,
OpenOffice.org MarCon (Marketing Contact) NZ
http://marketing.openoffice.org/contacts.html
Re: [email] RE: [Discuss] ASF hosted openoffice.org email service
[Was: Re: [Discussion] dev@openoffice.org]
Posted by Kazunari Hirano <kh...@gmail.com>.
Hi Terry and all,
On Sun, Aug 21, 2011 at 6:21 PM, Terry Ellison <te...@apache.org> wrote:
> OOo depends on their support.
Right! OOo depends on their support in their local language or in
their native language.
:)
Thanks,
khirano
Re: [email] RE: [Discuss] ASF hosted openoffice.org email service
[Was: Re: [Discussion] dev@openoffice.org]
Posted by Terry Ellison <te...@apache.org>.
On 20/08/11 21:00, Rob Weir wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 20, 2011 at 3:47 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton
>> 1. One has to do with name@openoffice.org where this is a personal forwarding set up for some user (or entity) and it forwards to another e-mail address. If these are preserved, forwarding them to some other email address to then be forwarded to the original entity does not make a lot of sense. The issue here is that the entity is known by that email address and has connections that access that entity by that email address.
>> It is a good idea to preserve that service so that the entities that have use of the individual ones can somehow manage their forwarding. I would not want to figure out how to retire it until later, and with considerable warning. Having an individual's e-mail address disappear is not a pleasant experience.
>>
> ... How does this help us develop and publish open source software? ...
>
There seems little point in developing any FLOSS package which doesn't
meet the needs of its user population, as we will end up with an unused
product. I repeat that OpenOffice.org targets the general PC-owning
population as its user-base. This is very different to Apache Server,
Traffic Server, Subversion and the other Apache projects that typically
have a niche IT proficient and often IT professional user population.
Clearly, the success of any FLOSS package depends on the support of a
committed core of able developers. However, the success of OOo also
depends on a wide community of contributors, documentation and tutorial
developers, community supporter and even just power-users who can
evangelise the product.
We have historically encouraged this community to use their oo.o
mailboxes to foster a sense of identity. I know that I used to use my
TerryE@openoffice.org address a lot: answering end-user emails and as my
email address for a range of forums, wikis and similar services. I was
and am proud to be associated with this project. However, because I
realise that the address might go away, I had to trawl through my emails
to work out which services I had subscribed to using TerryE@oo.o and
rehook them to another mailbox: a real pain -- but less painful than
suddenly finding out that I had become disconnected from them. So my
answer is that alienating our extended community of supporters would not
be something that we should do lightly. OOo depends on their support.
//Terry