openoffice-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Terry Ellison <>
Subject Re: Refactoring the brand: Apache ooo + (was branding)
Date Tue, 02 Aug 2011 14:39:27 GMT

I think that you've missed my point.  The guy didn't THREATEN to leave.  
He HAS left.  I doubt we will get him back.  My strong reaction was 
because of that entirely avoidable loss of 5+ man-years of project 
expertise that we will be pressed to recover for the sake on an 
ill-considered shout-down.  Was this really wise?

Yes, I have only been on the DL for two days, but I have been a major 
contributor to community side of the OOo project for five years.  And in 
my 30+ years in this business, I've seen lots of f***ed up project 
take-overs in my business unit.  I was trying to flag up that this old 
dog is starting to sniff another one, and I would REALLY like to prevent 
this happening.

You seem to be positioning yourself as the project leader and absolute 
arbiter of Apache policy, and YOU have caused a valuable asset to this 
project to walk, yet you seem to be totally unaware of this -- or are 
and don't care.  If we keep this up then this Apache project will drive 
away many if not most of the ex-OOo team who want to contribute.  You'll 
be left with an extremely tidy and well-managed DL but no OpenOffice 

If this is the Apache way, then this will be a sad outcome.  But is this 
the Apache way or just your individual interpretation?  I do wonder what 
is the biggest project that you've run personally, or have you even done 
this before?

Regards Terry

On 02/08/11 14:40, Rob Weir wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 9:00 AM, TerryE<>  wrote:
>> <snip>
>>> Regardless... it doesn't matter to me anymore.  I'm stepping out of
>>> this discussion now, and stepping away from anything to do with OOo
>>> documentation, including the OOo Wiki.
>>> Clayton
>> This was the outcome of an ill considered discussion.  Clayton, is the one
>> guy who really understands how the documentation is put together.  He's been
>> working full time on this for at least 5 years that I know of.  He was
>> kicked in the teeth by Oracle, albeit for ration if perhaps impersonal
>> commercial drivers, and now has to consider his future options.  Despite
>> this and somewhat to my surprise he was willing to re-engage and support OOo
>> in the future within Apache.  His departure would truly be a loss to the
>> project and one that I think we all should regret.
>> In my naiveté I did get the impression that the project would be a flat
>> consensual collaborative organisation rather than a hierarchical dictat,
>> albeit with the Apache umbrella.   OK, I fully accept that I don't
>> understand the "Apache way" yet, but in my days in EDS I had technical
>> oversight in taking over many account teams and ensuring continuity of
>> service (most far larger than this project) as well as running large teams
>> myself.  I have no interest in shovelling this shit in future but I do know
>> how to get the team to vanish like sand through your fingers.  One sure way
>> is not to listen to considered and rational experience, to ride roughshod
>> over peoples input, and to use sarcasm as a tool in sensitive dialogue.
>>   These people are volunteers contributing pro-bono, not servants.  If this
>> is going to be the culture of this project, then it is going to wither and
>> die.
> By your strong reaction, Terry, after only being on the list for 2
> days, I suspect that you are not yet accustomed to the way we are
> debating.  No one is shutting anything down.  We're discussing.  When
> there is consensus then we move forward.
> Decision making at Apache is described here:
> It is a good read.  In particular I see nothing about trying to force
> decisions by threatening to leave the project.  But maybe I missed
> that line ;-)
> And remember experience at OOo is not the sole fons et origo of
> wisdom.  There are other sources of relevant knowledge and experience.
>   We should try to respect all views raised on this list, and not try
> to close down arguments by saying, "That's the way we always did it at
> OOo" or "I'm more experienced in doing things my way, therefore
> everyone else should yield".  Those are not ways to reach consensus.
> Similarly, there are parts of Apache that are non-negotiable and areas
> where we have some discretion in the project.  The Apache 2.0 license
> is an example of something that is non-negotiable.
> -Rob

View raw message