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

Hi Italo,

thanks for your reply.

On 10/02/2022 16.31, Italo Vignoli wrote:
On 2/10/22 13:36, Michael Weghorn wrote:
Of course, in case the main intention were for TDF to provide more business-like services (like an LTS version or creating an impression of "donate a certain amount of money and your pet bug will be fixed"), I see very well how that might interfere significantly with the business model of ecosystem companies.

Totally agree. But I don't see the issue, as ESC and BoD members could easily stop any project before it starts, when there is a potential risk of conflict. AFAIK, major development activities are scrutinized by both bodies, as they are ranked in order of importance, suggested, approved and transformed to tenders, or not considered for tendering.

I totally agree, extending that process to cover significant tasks that internal developers would work on may be a solution.

Development activities which are not considered for tendering, or just ignored, could probably be developed by TDF without creating disruptions (or even discussions).

To double-check nobody is "secretly" working on that as well or is planning to do so, discussing/mentioning larger items first certainly won't hurt. (But that doesn't only apply for work done by TDF developers; e.g. the weekly ESC call already has a "What’s cooking" section where that would fit well.)

I am rather sure that in 7 million lines of code (plus the open bugs) there are enough challenges for everyone.


Of course, given my complete lack of understanding of development, is too easy to find a technical angle to disprove what I just wrote, [...]

At least from my developer's perspective, I totally agree with what you wrote.

Best regards,

To unsubscribe e-mail to:
Posting guidelines + more:
List archive:
Privacy Policy:


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.