openoffice-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rob Weir <>
Subject Re: Process for deciding on branding strategy for our first release
Date Mon, 31 Oct 2011 23:37:21 GMT
On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 4:13 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton
<> wrote:
> As far as I can tell, it is a condition of Apache governance that it be done on the list.
 That is a requirement for how The Apache Way works.  It is up to all of us to have it work.

Is that really true?  Or is that just convention of projects that have
a single list?  For example, didn't we just vote to agree to let the
Forums make decisions related to Forum governance on the forums.

> I don't believe, however, that ooo-marketing counts as a list where deliberation on matters
of the project should happen.

It is useful to make a distinction between discussions/deliberations
and decisions.  And note the power and value of due notice.

For example, if we agree to always notify on the ooo-dev list about an
important topic that is coming up for discussion, then I don't see why
the actual discussion could not happen on another list controlled by
the project.  Similarly, it is not rocket science to cc ooo-dev on the
vote thread so anyone who is not following the discussion can jump
over to ooo-marketing to catch up, or to just vote.  This is very
similar to how we cc private@incubator.apache,org when we start a
committer [VOTE] thread.  It is about fairness, due notice and
exclusivity.  In the end, people cast votes, not lists.

> It does not strike me that a lazy consensus is appropriate there, unless it is to bring
something to this list.

The functions handled by this project will continue to grow.
Marketing, QA, translation, documentation, site management, all added
on to the dev work that is growing as well.  We already have the
largest dev list at Apache.  We need to develop ways of scaling.  Not
vertically via a hierarchy.  But horizontally through self-selected
groups of participants that are working on a common goal.  And we need
to do this in a way that allows us to preserve focus.  Having all
discussions on all topics, in all languages, on ooo-dev is not going
to succeed.  But we can certainly ensure that, for example, ooo-dev is
cc'ed on all initial proposal posts, or all initial vote posts, so
those who do have an interest can jump in.

> I also notice that the choice of product name suddenly forked onto ooo-user too.  Whoever
did that was not being helpful.

That looks like a user brought that discussion up on their own on
ooo-user.  It is good that they care enough about the product to
comment on it.


>  - Dennis
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [] On Behalf Of Alexandro Colorado
> Sent: Monday, October 31, 2011 12:40
> To:
> Subject: Re: Process for deciding on branding strategy for our first release
> On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 1:38 PM, Rob Weir <> wrote:
>> On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 3:32 PM, Alexandro Colorado <>
>> wrote:
>> > On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 1:15 PM, Rob Weir <> wrote:
>> >
>> >> Looking at the dev work that remains, I think we need to move forward
>> >> on this with deliberate speed.  This impacts both the branding on our
>> >> 3.4 release, as well as the branding on our web sites, both of which
>> >> are making strong progress.
>> >>
>> >> I think there are two main elements we need to decide on:
>> >>
>> >> 1) Product name:  Apache OpenOffice, Apache or something
>> >> else
>> >>
>> >> 2) Logo, for use on website, product splash screen etc.
>> >>
>> >> I propose that we discuss these topics on the ooo-marketing for two
>> >> weeks, until November 14th.  If there is consensus on these questions
>> >> then we will go forward to implement that consensus.  But if there is
>> >> no consensus by the 14th, then we will have a 72-hour vote of PPMC
>> >> members to decide among the alternatives.
>> >>
>> >> Of course, it is better to reach consensus on such questions, but a
>> >> product name is not optional, so we need to resolve these questions
>> >> one way or another.
>> >>
>> >> Any objections to this general approach and time frame?
>> >>
>> >> -Rob
>> >>
>> >
>> > My largest issue is basically the way is being handled this voting,
>> usually
>> > it seems that is not as easily traceable as a poll. Mailing list can
>> easily
>> > bury vote by just having chatty people or flamewars.
>> > I rather see the forum as a more dynamic way to reach consensus like they
>> > do with a voting poll separate from the overall discussion why is a good
>> > idea or not. Also I would miss the ability to change the voting in case
>> the
>> > voter realize that he has a change of heart. I do like the timeline.
>> > So I would propose a decision making framework to account vote, change
>> > votes, and easily browse/review overall group decisions.
>> >
>> The way an Apache project typically does this is via separate
>> [DISCUSSION] and [VOTE] threads.  So it would be clear which is which.
>>  And in the [VOTE] thread we would only count the last vote a person
>> makes, so they can change their vote freely.
>> But I would only have a [VOTE] if after 2 weeks there was still no
>> consensus.
>> Would that work?
> not really
>> -Rob
>> > --
>> > *Alexandro Colorado*
>> > ** Español
>> >
>> > fingerprint: E62B CF77 1BEA 0749 C0B8 50B9 3DE6 A84A 68D0 72E6
>> >
> --
> *Alexandro Colorado*
> ** Español
> fingerprint: E62B CF77 1BEA 0749 C0B8 50B9 3DE6 A84A 68D0 72E6

View raw message