Date: prev next · Thread: first prev next last
2022 Archives by date, by thread · List index


Hi *,

quick comment on the below -

Paolo Vecchi wrote:
Very brief summary of the events:

Back in March 2020, other new board members and I, started making enquiries
in regards to why we weren't making available an up to date LOOL to the
community. We were clearly "advertising" LOOL on the website but it wasn't
in a easily usable state and I strongly believed we had to do our part to
help e.g. schools and non-profits coping with remote working when the
pandemic started hitting hard. After all, TDF has been created for the
public benefit, and in this new situation with the lockdown, what would have
been more beneficial to the general public than to support pupils, students,
volunteers in nonprofits by providing a platform and sharing our knowledge,
based on Free and Open Source Software? This would have allowed our
Foundation and us, as citizens, to perform our civic duty to help and it
would also have had a positive marketing effect for the members of the
ecosystem. Unfortunately that opportunity is now lost, mostly in favor of
proprietary vendors which just consolidate their position. It's sad. It's a
lost opportunity for TDF and for the ecosystem.

I agree it's an opportunity lost. In many ways indeed - losing
LibreOffice Online's active developer base was not inevitable. That it
did happen in the end, after many people tried to solve the brewing
conflict, was to a considerable degree caused by part of the board
persistently threatening with unilateral action.

In terms of helping schools and non-profits, many things did happen (I
know for certain that Free Software, including LibreOffice, gained
noticeable user traction here in Germany). Regarding LibreOffice
Online though, that wouldn't have been something that TDF could have
hosted ourselves for the world at large. Implying then, that if only
TDF had offered free downloads of the server RPMs, we would have
managed to significantly dent the market share of the integrated cloud
vendors - seems to be quite naive to me.

I'd like to now decouple this discussion from the thread topic (which
is about a general attic process). If there's a need for further
discussion (I'd _much_ prefer forward-looking debates, rather than
re-litigating the past!), please all, start a new thread, and I'll
answer there.

All the best,

-- Thorsten

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


Context


Privacy Policy | Impressum (Legal Info) | Copyright information: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images on this website are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is licensed under the Mozilla Public License (MPLv2). "LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use thereof is explained in our trademark policy.