incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Louis Suarez-Potts <>
Subject Re: [ Re: OpenOffice and the ASF]
Date Thu, 02 Jun 2011 01:41:08 GMT

On 2011-06-01, at 20:18 , Ross Gardler wrote:

> [cc'ing Italo and Louis hopefully they have joined the incubator list already, but just
in case]

Thanks. I actually have already joined it.  
So, to the list: Wave of hand signifying hello!

And, again, delighted this is moving ahead transparently and openly.

And I would also underscore that with the proposed placement of OOo core (and more?) development
within Apache, that a lot of the old problems and procedural issues should evaporate as no
longer being relevant.

My questions then are absolutely pragmatic and relate—hence the to post—to issues not
so far discussed:

* Apache Foundation owns the trademark to OOo?
* We at OOo receive lots of requests to use it for mostly good purposes. We grant these, with
minimal fuss and have set up systems to do that more efficiently. With the change in trademark
ownership—if?—the situation will naturally change. I'd like some clarity on that.

* Similarly, OOo is more than a developer community; it's also a shifting set of globally
dispersed ecosystems built around the primary application and concerned with the usual open
source matters—support, education, training, services, migration, etc. I've worked hard
to help set many of these up, and to establish the ecosystems, so that there is a real market
for the ODF and OOo, as well as its relatives.  What now?

Finally, I'll call a special Community Council (what is left of it, if any)
to go over the quite significant (as in totally tectonic) change. We—the OOo community,
basically—really do want and even need to understand the Quo of the Vadis:  what we are
doing henceforth, where we are going.

> On 02/06/2011 01:01, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>> More info re TDF and LOo
>> ----- Forwarded message from Italo Vignoli<>
>> Date: Wed, 01 Jun 2011 23:16:53 +0200
>> From: Italo Vignoli<>
>> Reply-To:
>> To: Jim Jagielski<>
>> CC: Louis Suarez-Potts<>,
>> 	Sam Ruby<>
>> Subject: Re: OpenOffice and the ASF
> ...
>> I will also read carefully the proposal, and make my comments. I
>> understand that it might still be improved (correct me if I am wrong,
>> because I have had just a few minutes for going through it, and to me
>> it looks incomplete or too succinct in some areas).
> I agree with this and have asked some questions on the general@incubator. The answers
seem perfectly reasonable to me (see below to a link to the main response and the rest of
the thread). However, I'm not a part of the TDF or LOo communities so please bring your own,
more relevant, questions and suggestions to the incubator list.
>> OOo is a very large project with a very large and diverse community.
>> In my opinion, it would be a pity to lose a percentage of this
>> community because the proposal is not inclusive enough).
> +1
> It's worth reading Robs reply to my question about the limited initial committer list.
I felt it indicated a level of inclusion that is not yet fully represented in the proposal
(other than this is the ASF and thus by definition inclusive). He said:
> "We could have put a much longer list of IBM names on this list, developers familiar
with the code base via their work on Lotus Symphony (which is our OpenOffice based project).
But then we could have been criticized for the proposal being too dominated by IBM. It is
clearly our intent to grow this project, both from our corporate developers, but also by recruiting
new members to the project, including developers from related open source projects (see my
previous note)" See (the previous note referred
to is
> It would be great if you could work with Rob to make the proposal reflect this intention
and is, as far as possible, accommodating to the TDF and LOo communities ...
>> I will be away until Sunday, but I will read emails every now and then.
> ... when you get back :-)
> Ross


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

View raw message