openoffice-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Peter Kovacs <>
Subject Re: Community building: give our User a chance to contribute!
Date Fri, 20 Jan 2017 07:35:50 GMT
Dennis, I agree that the PMC has to take the discussion in the end. 
However for me as a noob, the PMC is a Part of the ASF.
I also agree on the beeing specific part. Thats why I would like to have 
better layout, because I believe that centers the discussion more 
solution finding.

This is also a topic that in my eyes is a PMC core point. We have a 
unique Community structure, because a lot of our community are none IT 
knowlegeable folks.
And currently we do only little work in community building. Plus we 
realy suck from the dev side in communicating with our community.

I personally do not care so much if we have 100 entities following up on 
the goal.
But in my eyes we need a way to ensure project health and turn towards 
the community we have. We were last year at the edge of project 
retirement. We are slowly fighting our way out by pure voluntary work of 
people that belive in the market name Open Office.
How long can we keep this up? Especially with the constant annoyance of 
Libre Office shooting at our faulty structures.
We need ways to build strebgthen our core, and that goes beyond what we 
do now. How we can achieve this I do not know.

I think LibreOffice are to a certain degree correct. The ASF is not 
capable to do the Project Open Office at this Point. The structure of 
Libre Office is a much more healthy one for the kind of Project 
Libre/Open Office is.
However I think we can build a similar powerfull structure if not more 
powerfull. At the same time we must walk in Sync with the ASF.

This is what the Discussion is all about. If we move in the wrong 
direction, please suggest a better one.

At least this is my view on the topic. I declare also that I personally 
have no interest in payed dev work. I switch my employee soon, and my 
future employee restricts my codeing work towards my contract with the 
ASF. I am currently enjoy more freedom. I am doing this out of love 
towards Open Office. I say this so no one gets the wrong thoughts.

All the best

On 19.01.2017 17:14, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
> I have comments in-line.
> Also, let us speak of chicken and egg.
> I observe that the Board and the Offices of ASF do not wish to deal with hypothetical
cases.  Exceptions must be specific and actionable.  Also, exceptions do not create precedents.
 If one project sees something they want as exception for them, they must create specific
exception of their own.  (AOO has exception for bundling some writing tools in binaries only,
not in source code, because licenses are incompatible.  It is very specific and not a precedent
for other projects. When details of another exception are worked out, it is often revealed
that the cases are not the same. The ASF avoids common risk of others seeing more "precedent"
for their case than there actually is.)
> It seems to me that if there is a request for some sort of external relationship(s),
the external parties must already exist and be prepared to provide detailed agreement on how
it will partner with AOO project in a way that preserves the principles and purpose of the
ASF in how AOO participates in the arrangement.  This is not hard.
> I do not think making exceptions about hypothetical arrangements and then seeking external
parties will work.
> That is why it may be better for external party to be created first, operating as good
downstream citizen, before requiring anything of the AOO PMC and ASF Board.  Ideally, no significant
attention will be required.  The only thing external entity cannot do, and PMC would have
to intervene, is make use of Apache trademarks in other than allowed ways.  Since it is not
proposed that the external entity release any software product, this should be agreeable.
> Also, the external party should not promise others that requested features will be incorporated
in AOO in the manner they desire.  They will never have the authority to control AOO project
actions, even though by mutual work, there may often be good alignment.
> Only my thoughts, not thoughts from any PMC or Board discussion.
>   - Dennis
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Peter Kovacs []
>> Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2017 23:08
>> To:;
>> Subject: Re: Community building: give our User a chance to contribute!
>> Star Citizen proofed that a community can follow developers intend and
>> raise the money needed.
>> Even if we can not use the business model, we can learn something from
>> their communication model they have developed.
>> Also what becomes clear to me is that we can not operate with a single
>> entity. If I consider that we need to position us global right from the
>> start, this is not so bad.
>> Maybe it would be better if we lay out a white paper on some model. Then
>> we talk about this. We can then check for concerns. Note them down and
>> find a solution for it.
>> @Raphael do you like to write your idea in a document? I think we have a
>> similar idea. Maybe I can put my idea as variation suggestion next to it
>> afterwards.
> [orcmid]
> Raphael raised his questions on  The responses are informative.
>> Then we can see if we can refine the document.
>> I think we need to focus on reaching a goal somehow, this discussion
>> dissolves somewhat because we focus to much on the ASF and bugs. Then on
>> goals concepts and stuff.
>> When we have a clear view, we can reach out to the ASF and hear their
>> concerns, update the concept based on their feedback. I assume this way
>> we will find a solution that works for everybody.
> [orcmid]
> If you do not understand the concerns of the ASF and that AOO is ASF project, you may
waste your time.  It works best to operate in models of external support that have worked
> Please consider this document now in draft, meant to be aligned with detailed documents
it refers to:
> <>.
> I recommend that all developers interested in this discussion also subscribe to
where good discussion can be held.
> Also, it is the PMC that must communicate with ASF Board.  The PMC is responsible for
the care of the project in terms of satisfying and preserving ASF spirit for projects.
> Discussion and creation on dev@ is fine.  But PMC must as a body agree to some proposal
if it is so exceptional that Board approval is required.
>> In Germany it is said that to lay out a business model takes 8 -16
>> month. So IMHO we have time, does not need to be perfect.
>> All the best
>> Peter
>> Dennis E. Hamilton < <> >
>> schrieb am Mi., 18. Jan. 2017, 17:36:
>> 	> -----Original Message-----
>> 	> From: Raphael Bircher [
>> <> ]
>> 	> Sent: Tuesday, January 17, 2017 21:36
>> 	> To: <>
>> 	> Subject: Re: Community building: give our User a chance to
>> contribute!
>> 	>
>> 	> Am .01.2017, 05:31 Uhr, schrieb Dennis E. Hamilton
>> < <> >:
>> 	>
>> 	[ ... ]
>> 	>
>> 	> I personaly don't believe in that model for Apache OpenOffice.
>> There is
>> 	> no
>> 	> need for a customized version of Apache OpenOffice. And the
>> people who
>> 	> fork, do it normaly to have there own product. They don't want to
>> 	> upstream. But Yes, it is one model, who exist within ASF. Not
>> that I'm
>> 	> completely against this way... If someone finds a way, to
>> generate money
>> 	> to contribute back, it would be nice. But I don't think it's the
>> right
>> 	> way.
>> 	>
>> 	> I'm more with the payed feature model
>> 	[orcmid]
>> 	That was also discussed - creation of an external organization that
>> would arrange paid features and contribute to Apache OpenOffice.  That
>> must be external to ASF.  And either (1) there are AOO committers who
>> participate in both or (2) AOO committer and PMC must accept the changes
>> and the AOO project incorporates features in AOO releases.
>> 	So the feature organization would need to be able to do everything
>> but make distributions to provide tested, quality features.  Or have AOO
>> committers in the feature organization to work on feature branches of
>> 	In all cases, there must be *no* payment process or fund-raising
>> process that involves the ASF.  That is key requirement #1.  I see that
>> Bertrand Delacretaz has provided a good answer about this on
>> <> .
>> 	AND
>> 	The greatest barrier of all is key requirement #2: finding already-
>> capable OpenOffice developers who have the capacity and willingness to
>> do such work.  The fees that an OpenOffice features organization would
>> pay must be enough. Someone with the required at-hand skills can already
>> earn $100,000 per year and more (in US), with all benefits available
>> where they work.  I do not know comparable salaries in EU.  I believe it
>> is still expensive in terms of how much money feature-organization must
>> raise.  Also, providing contract agreements for performance of feature
>> delivery is also complicated.
>> 	There is a great misunderstanding in the user community of how much
>> feature development costs using developers with professional, at-hand
>> skills.
>> 	 - Dennis
>> 	>
>> 	> >
>> 	> > We can dig up that conversation if you like.
>> 	> I would be interested, where the discussion ends ;-)
>> 	>
>> 	> Regards Raphael
>> 	> --
>> 	> Mein Blog:
>> 	>
>> 	> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>> ----
>> 	> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
>> <>
>> 	> For additional commands, e-mail:
>> <>
>> 	-------------------------------------------------------------------
>> --
>> 	To unsubscribe, e-mail:
>> <>
>> 	For additional commands, e-mail:
>> <>
>> --
>> Disclaimer: Diese Nachricht stammt aus einem Google Account. Ihre
>> Antwort wird in der Google Cloud Gespeichert und durch Google
>> Algorythmen zwecks werbeanaöysen gescannt. Es ist derzeit nicht
>> auszuschließen das ihre Nachricht auch durch einen NSA Mitarbeiter
>> geprüft wird. Durch kommunikation mit diesen Account stimmen Sie zu das
>> ihre Mail, ihre Kontaktdaten und die Termine die Sie mit mir vereinbaren
>> online zu Google konditionen in der Googlecloud gespeichert wird.
>> Sollten sie dies nicht wünschen kontaktieren sie mich bitte Umgehend um
>> z.B. alternativen zu verhandeln.
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message