openoffice-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rob Weir <apa...@robweir.com>
Subject Re: Refactoring the brand: Apache ooo + OpenOffice.org? (was re:OpenOffice.org branding)
Date Wed, 03 Aug 2011 13:38:42 GMT
On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 9:20 AM, Ian Lynch <ianrlynch@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 3 August 2011 14:14, Rob Weir <apache@robweir.com> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 9:02 AM, TerryE <ooo@ellisons.org.uk> wrote:
>> > On 03/08/11 13:57, Rob Weir wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 7:58 AM, Andre Schnabel<Andre.Schnabel@gmx.net>
>> >>  wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> Hi Rob,
>> >>>
>> >>> -------- Original-Nachricht --------
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Von: Rob Weir<apache@robweir.com>
>> >>>> On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 2:39 AM, Manfred A. Reiter<ma.reiter@gmail.com
>> >
>> >>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> 2011/8/3 Rob Weir<apache@robweir.com>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 6:10 PM, Manfred A. Reiter<
>> ma.reiter@gmail.com>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> 2011/8/2 Rob Weir<apache@robweir.com>
>> >>>
>> >>> ....
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> Curiously, it reports only 5 of the 35,020 users
as having been
>> >>>>
>> >>>> active
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> in the past 7 days.
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> did you poked around 1 year ago as well?
>> >>>>>>> do you have an explanation, why these numbers are slowing
down?
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>> ...
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> 2. May be, my english is not good enough to understand, wheather
your
>> >>>>> your response answers my questions.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>> If you have an unanswered question, please restate it,
>> >>>
>> >>> It's still in the quoted mail.
>> >>>
>> >>>> perhaps
>> >>>> rephrase if you think it was originally misunderstood.
>> >>>
>> >>> Afaics there is nothing to be misunderstood in the (two) question(s).
>> >>>
>> >> Ah.  OK.  He was asking for speculation on why the traffic is less now
>> >> than a year ago.  Impossible to say, since I can't find any data on
>> >> what the traffic actually was a year ago.  One way to back speculation
>> >> with facts would be to get a log of edits from last year, gather the
>> >> editors who were most active then, and contact them with a set of
>> >> survey questions.
>> >>
>> > Rob, I think that I covered this point to some degree in an earlier post
>> > today :-)  //Terry
>> >
>>
>> Sorry, replacing Andre's speculation with your speculation is not the
>> same as introducing facts.
>>
>> -Rob
>>
>> >
>>
>
> I think there is a difference between informed hypothesis and speculation
> :-)

And neither is the same as facts.  I'm concerned when I hear
paternalistic statements of "our contributors will never post patches"
or "They would never ever sign the iCLA", or "If we don't let them
contribute anonymously with 1-character passwords and fake names under
an eclectic license of their choice then they will kill themselves".
Have we asked them?  Are we really certain that all 35,000 registered
wiki users are incapable or unwilling to sign a piece of paper and
mail it to Apache?  Have we had this conversation with them?  Have we
even brought it up?   Have we explained the workings of Apache
projects to them and how the meritocracy works?   Have we even sent
all registered wiki users a note, telling them that we're moving to
Apache and inviting them to join us?  Have we proposed the idea of the
iCLA to them and explained the benefits to them, how it would ensure
the license to their contributions was clear and ensures that their
contributions could then be reused by others?

I really expect more, much more, from our PPMC members, in terms of
community outreach and community development.  These are important
goals for the project.  This is not achieved by having 2 or 3 people
claiming to speak for the opinions of thousands.  It is done by
reaching out to those thousands and showing them the benefits of
working at Apache, and inviting them to join us here.

-Rob

>
> --
> Ian
>
> Ofqual Accredited IT Qualifications (The Schools ITQ)
>
> www.theINGOTs.org +44 (0)1827 305940
>
> The Learning Machine Limited, Reg Office, 36 Ashby Road, Tamworth,
> Staffordshire, B79 8AQ. Reg No: 05560797, Registered in England and
> Wales.
>

Mime
View raw message