From general-return-28512-apmail-incubator-general-archive=incubator.apache.org@incubator.apache.org Wed Jun 1 16:32:05 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-incubator-general-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-general-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 5F3EB6F29 for ; Wed, 1 Jun 2011 16:32:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 1279 invoked by uid 500); 1 Jun 2011 16:32:04 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-general-archive@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 1081 invoked by uid 500); 1 Jun 2011 16:32:04 -0000 Mailing-List: contact general-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: general@incubator.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list general@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 1073 invoked by uid 99); 1 Jun 2011 16:32:04 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 01 Jun 2011 16:32:04 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.7 required=5.0 tests=FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,RFC_ABUSE_POST,SPF_PASS,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of bimargulies@gmail.com designates 209.85.214.47 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.214.47] (HELO mail-bw0-f47.google.com) (209.85.214.47) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 01 Jun 2011 16:31:58 +0000 Received: by bwz5 with SMTP id 5so237250bwz.6 for ; Wed, 01 Jun 2011 09:31:37 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=pvUcrAa9DG9dU4yUPnP/nvFUPCxhOwwOgd5f1eBBl3w=; b=dOYQL69tTCqCM/TWcMHH3YNcfql9YL+2Q+zS0998O+BVfs/6yb9HhDGBnyjYcgGRco JECiC6rEg4fBUXKabR4ubsRg02lZ+i0IEZLfx5gjQFdYYOt6WzL8OdFuUKtBkprfSL1p uZpEy8nQ3B2dKoJyBt8RMJSeRMd93iTcJfgcs= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; b=MeODCbubd5fmT78ACX6eHgexVVFw1ouITQaPllYioLs4kzkoBtjdb4PReM8aK2AxrO kvcrty0WteLNohHeN3Aa8CVQe1xo9Ywzr5YjzAvF51DNAhDzK82yZljQu2x5CSbnyBfG aW8RvA8XF7oFo1xfpVxc5CIX0RsRlt6zlHzaM= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.204.50.66 with SMTP id y2mr7421280bkf.81.1306945897551; Wed, 01 Jun 2011 09:31:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.204.69.204 with HTTP; Wed, 1 Jun 2011 09:31:37 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <4DE66703.4000007@apache.org> References: <4DE65D8F.8060002@oracle.com> <4DE66703.4000007@apache.org> Date: Wed, 1 Jun 2011 12:31:37 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: OpenOffice.org Apache Incubator Proposal From: Benson Margulies To: general@incubator.apache.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org > There are only two initial committers identified in the proposal. Why only > two for such a large codebase? > Not only is it a very large code base, it was a weakly maintained and documented code base for quite some time before the Sun->Oracle->LO-Split/Splat process. We generally expect Apache project to provide a reasonable level of support for their users. Questions should be answered. Not all issues will get fixed, but they will be responded to in some timely way. I'm writing here from personal experience: at my day job, we put a ton of work into building a Java extension for OO, and we ended up doing a vast amount of reverse engineering in the face of incomplete (and in some cases completely incorrect) documentation. In general, I'm all in favor of giving a nacent community every opportunity to itself together in the incubator, but this one faces such high barriers that I'm worried. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org