openoffice-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Donald Whytock <dwhyt...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Wrongful information on the Wikipedia
Date Tue, 15 Sep 2015 19:08:23 GMT
"Moribund" means "dying".  It's a goofy word, yes, which means it's an
attention-getting word, which means people will look at it and say, "What
the hell does THAT mean?" and focus on why someone would call AOO that.

Is "dying" more accurate than "dormant" to describe AOO?  "Dying" suggests
the project is in decline and will only continue to decline.  Does anyone
here think "dying" is more accurate than, say, "Stalled"?

Don

On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 2:37 PM, Phillip Rhodes <motley.crue.fan@gmail.com>
wrote:

> "Moribund" is a goofy word that almost nobody uses in conversation, but
> it's probably more accurate than "dormant".   I've spent enough time
> goofing around on Wikipedia lately, so, for myself, I'm quite happy to
> leave it as is, until the 4.1.2 release comes out.  At that point, I think
> it's clear that it should then be made "Active".
>
> *shrug*
>
>
> Phil
>
> This message optimized for indexing by NSA PRISM
>
> On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 10:48 AM, Donald Whytock <dwhytock@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
> > There was a minor skirmish last week over it.  Looks like there'll be one
> > this week too...someone changed it to "moribund".
> >
> > On Fri, Sep 11, 2015 at 6:54 PM, Phillip Rhodes <
> motley.crue.fan@gmail.com
> > >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Sorry, I missed the infobox when I looked at the page.  You're right,
> > > having "Dormant" there is flat out wrong and very misleading.
> > >
> > > I changed it to "Active" just now and added a ref pointer to the 4.1.2
> > > release schedule that Andrea just provided.  I just hope there aren't
> > > certain parties with a vested interest in denigrating AOO sitting
> around
> > > planning to start a revert war over this.   :-(
> > >
> > >
> > > Phil
> > >
> > >
> > > This message optimized for indexing by NSA PRISM
> > >
> > > On Thu, Sep 10, 2015 at 10:08 AM, Max Merbald <max.merbald@gmx.de>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi Phil,
> > > >
> > > > what I meant was the infobox at the top right. In that box it says
> that
> > > > AOO is dormat, which is not correct and which is not in the
> citations.
> > > The
> > > > presence of a citation does not necessry mean that the claimed info
> is
> > in
> > > > the citation. If people read on the Wikipedia that AOO is "dormant"
> > > they'll
> > > > start looking for different office software.
> > > >
> > > > Max
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Am 03.09.2015 um 23:12 schrieb Phillip Rhodes:
> > > >
> > > >> I just looked at the Wikipedia page and don't see anything that's
-
> > > >> strictly speaking - incorrect, or lacking citations.  IOW, I don't
> see
> > > any
> > > >> supportable rationale for removing anything that's there, although
> one
> > > >> could question the motives of whoever made it a point to call out
> some
> > > >> concerns about lack of activity in the first paragaph of the
> article.
> > > >> Nonetheless, I think any attempt to modify that will face
> opposition.
> > > >>
> > > >> In a related vein, The Guardian recently ran this article titled
> > > "Should I
> > > >> Switch From Apache OpenOffice to LibreOffice or Microsoft Office".
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > >
> >
> http://www.theguardian.com/technology/askjack/2015/sep/03/switch-openoffice-libreoffice-or-microsoft-office
> > > >>
> > > >> I don't know if there's any easy way to counter this narrative
> that's
> > > >> spreading through the press, about AOO being dead/dormant/whatever,
> or
> > > how
> > > >> LO is clearly "the winner", but it's definitely unfortunate to see
> > this
> > > >> kind of stuff spread around so widely.  :-(
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> Phil
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> This message optimized for indexing by NSA PRISM
> > > >>
> > > >> On Thu, Sep 3, 2015 at 4:55 PM, Louis Suárez-Potts <
> luispo@gmail.com>
> > > >> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> Hi Max,
> > > >>>
> > > >>> On 03 Sep 15, at 16:31, Max Merbald <max.merbald@gmx.de>
wrote:
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Hi there,
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> the Engish Wikipedia claims that AOO is dormant. I can't see
where
> > > they
> > > >>>>
> > > >>> have the information from. The sources they use don't say so.
I
> think
> > > >>> it's
> > > >>> definitely bad for OpenOffice when people think no more is done
> about
> > > it.
> > > >>> The problem is also that LibreOffice has just published its version
> > 5.0
> > > >>> and
> > > >>> is getting ahead of us.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> thanks for the alert.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Wikipedia is composed by a crowd of editors, and you can change
the
> > > entry
> > > >>> to reflect the facts.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> So can anyone on this list. Becoming an editor at Wikipedia is
not
> > > >>> arduous.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Louis
> > > >>>
> > > >>>> Max
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > >>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> > > >>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> > > >>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >
> > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message