----- Original Message ----
> From: Jim Jagielski <[email protected]>
> To: [email protected]
> Cc: Robert Burrell Donkin <[email protected]>;
>[email protected]
> Sent: Sat, 4 June, 2011 19:12:45
> Subject: [steering-discuss] Re: OpenOffice.org Apache Incubator Proposal:
>Splitting^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^HREUNITING the Community?
>
>
> On Jun 4, 2011, at 9:03 AM, Charles-H. Schulz wrote:
> >
> > We have been developing our governance and structure for 8 months. People
> > have put their trust and their faith in us. Why would you want us to scrap
> > that off in favor of something else and have people follow a governance
they
> > don't even know?
> >
>
> How can one respond to the question (and the original one that
> predicated this one) without someone misinterpreting it as
> confrontational, self-serving or condescending?
>
> One issue that was, from all I have been told and heard, is
> that having OOo at some place with a known track record,
> with real FOSS street cred and the ability to work with
> other FOSS organizations as well as commercial entities was
> important. That it wasn't just "getting rid" of OOo but instead
> placing it someplace where it had the best chance to growth,
> thrive and prosper.
>
> I've also been told that Oracle and TDF did discuss moving
> OOo there, but that in addition to some "requirements" that
> were unacceptable, that TDF was still a foundation-in-creation.
> Reading over the blogs, it is even admitted that the complexity
> and time involved in creating one was underestimated. The
> concern was putting the life and longevity of OOo into, basically,
> an unknown quantity.
>
> With that in mind, the ASF (or Eclipse) is much different. We've
> been a foundation since 1999, and an active force since 1994. We
> have a legal structure, a non-profit 501(c)3 status, existing
> infrastructure, a healthy fundraising effort, a methodology and
> governance model that is copied and well respected, and a proven track
> record of building exceptional FOSS projects and communities.
>
> There are *obvious* things that, with OOo in mind, the ASF lacks
> that TDF has in spades: the build and distribution system is the
> one which has been mentioned most of all. There are things that
> the TDF lacks that the ASF has in spades. I don't see why we can't
> work together to use each other to fill in the holes that the
> other lacks.
>
> P.S. I am again reminded by people (privately, in order to keep
> the noise down a bit) that although TDF is a major player in the
> OOo space, it is not "just" the ASF and TDF, but *everyone*.
Hi :)
I think there is a lot of confusion and mis-information out-there. Oracle
seems
to have an extremely bad reputation in FOSS communities. All the FOSS projects
that Sun used to run almost immediately forked as soon Oracle started to take
over, except perhaps VirtualBox.
While TDF has constantly communicated with Oracle there has been no response.
Oracle might be good at PR and marketing itself but it seems unable to deliver
anything. Just my opinion and i wasn't a founder member nor a current member.
It seems that you were kindly offering something that TDF would have valued
greatly if TDF had been in the position you were told it was in. Since that is
quite far from reality it upset people that thought you might have been trying
to take over. Perhaps whoever gave you the mis-information from was hoping
that
exactly this sort of misunderstanding would "drive a wedge between" Apache and
TDF. However, i think both organisations have a great deal to gain from
co-operating and that is exactly something that Oracle would dislike. I think
your offer was extremely generous and meant kindly.
Regards to all from
Tom :)
--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [email protected]
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
