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


Am 25.05.22 um 08:54 schrieb Michael Weghorn:

Hi Andreas, all,

On 24/05/2022 23.09, Andreas Mantke wrote:
I follow the thread(s) about hiring two in-ho use developers by TDF for
some month yet. I got the impression that there are some TDF members
which might have no real interest in getting this task done. They are
asking only questions and didn't submit any solutions or proposals for
solutions. And once all valuable input from TDF members had been
incorporated in the document the beforehand mentioned members try to
start the whole process with a new proposal.

It seemed there is a approach behind this behavior: postpone the whole
topic as far as possible. And try to frustrate the members who try to
drive this topic forward.

I agree that it is frustrating to see what is going on and to get the
impression that it seems to be impossible to work together on a common
proposal.

Obviously, I am not able to judge what each one's motivation is.

However, from following the discussion so far, I don't think it is
fair to blame only "one side" for the state of affairs.

While I am generally in favor of Paolo's proposal, I share the
impression that various concerns or suggestions have not been dealt
with adequately so far.

For example: Michael has asked for an ODF version of the proposal so
that he could suggest changes and he pointed out some specific issues
he saw in the proposal e.g. in [1].
Unless I'm missing something, he didn't receive any reply to that (at
least none on the public mailing list) and at a quick glance, (most
of) the mentioned passages are still unchanged in the current version
of the proposal.

Obviously, I can't speak for him, but I could at least understand to
some extent in case he felt unheard and that doing an own
counter-proposal would be the only way of his suggestions not just
being ignored completely...

I have worked together with a group of people on documents during the
last 1.5 year. The documents were not in an editable (e.g. ODF) format.
But everyone, who want to improve one of the documents, was able to
contribute and improve the documents. The format of a document didn't
hinder anyone to submit a valuable proposal / addition.

I want to add that this group was not made out of developers, but common
office workers.


My impression is that there seems to be no clear process of how to
work together on a proposal, how to suggest changes,...
It seemed to be a new territory to work on a proposal / document in
public on a mailing list.

Doesn't the BoD have any defined process for doing so?

(If somehow working together on the ODF version or talking to each
other in person is no option: From a developer's perspective, having
the proposal as plain text in a git repo and then allowing people to
suggest changes and the "proposal owner" reviewing those sounds like
one way that would allow to keep track of suggestions, but that may
not be easily usable for non-developers. Having a plain text version
being discussed on the mailing list and the proposal owner answering
there and integrating changes into the authoritative version sounds
like an alternative that might work instead, while having some more
overhead. But there are probably other ways...)

If you discuss about addition to the document on the mailing list and
add them to a document in another place, you have a media segregation.
This makes a work on the document not easy and some will loose track and
will quit to contribute further.

And if you'd use git for such a document you will only cover a small
part of the LibreOffice/TDF community. The non-devs will likely not able
to submit their input within a git repo.

Regards,
Andreas

--
## Free Software Advocate
## Plone add-on developer
## My blog: http://www.amantke.de/blog


--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: board-discuss+unsubscribe@documentfoundation.org
Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/
Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy

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.