[DECISION] Delayed atticization for LibreOffice Online

The long arm of the supervisor reaches several of us who dared to support the proposal to reopen the repo. In my case, trying to point out what can be said and what cannot.

Hi Andreas,

[1] https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/TDF/Policies/Attic#Deatticization_requirements

it is very interesting to read this criteria and compare it with the git
log of COOL. It seemed even this Github repo (project) didn't  attract
the number of volunteers, which are requested in the decision proposal.

Where in the deatticization requirements do you read the word "volunteer"? This is a very interesting and obvious misreading of the rules.

...
And as we are saying in Germany: Der Fisch stinkt vom Kopfe her.

Looks so. Why are you doing this?

Cheers,
Cor

Hi Paolo,

It's odd you say that as IIRC Mr Meeks said that since they move the

What is the use of writing "Mr Meeks" please?
It looks a bit odd to me, in a community where we simply say e.g. "Paolo". Or of course in case people possibly may not understand who Paolo is, "Paolo Vecchi".

project to Microsoft GitHub they had more contributors.

Why do you explicitly say "Microsoft GitHub"? Are there other GitHub's around that we may get confused with?

As stated in my answer to the "decision", it just needs to be re-run with a text that would allow the community a chance to do something.

I refer to my comments made on this list on July the 4th (and earlier on another one): no one is blocking anyone on working on the code and project they love.
If the conditions in the decisions are not met in three months, the project will be atticizised.
If conditions for de-atticizations (and those are similar) are met in four months, the repository will be de-atticizised.
How beautiful and simple it that.

Cheers,
Cor

Hi Andreas, all,

[changing the subject to reflect the discussion character]

Andreas Mantke wrote:

>> it is very interesting to read this criteria and compare it with the git
>> log of COOL. It seemed even this Github repo (project) didn't  attract
>> the number of volunteers, which are requested in the decision proposal.
>

Just to clarify - the attic decision talks about developers (volunteer
or not - should not make a difference).

The ESC proposal, on which this is based, considers Online to be of
medium complexity. To be able to maintain that code over longer
periods of time, 3 developers where deemed necessary.

So any comparison should count all commits I guess (that also makes
evaluation much easier - just run a git shortlog -n -s).

The last part of this 'communication strategy' reached me in private on
July, 3rd at 7.29pm, when I was told that I should contribute objective
reason / points to the debate around LOOL and the decision about its
atticization for LibreOffice Online.

And thanks for keeping the conversation here constructive indeed.

I suspect what happens was adherence to the board communication best
practices, which recommends to take bits of the conversation, which
are of no particular public interest, private.

This is a list with more than 200 subscribers - every not-so-relevant
email that people don't need to read, because it wasn't sent to the
list (or every email at least without a fullquote), leaves our
community more time & energy to do fun & productive work on the
project.

Cheers,

-- Thorsten

Hi Daniel,

The long arm of the supervisor reaches several of us who dared to support the proposal to reopen the repo. In my case, trying to point out what can be said and what cannot.

That's not good at all.

Have you received these types of notifications previously?
Do you know of others that received communications that are meant to dissuade people from expressing their legitimate opinions?

Would you, and anyone else that received similar communications, be willing to send a complaint to the CoC team or a trusted director for evaluation?

Ciao

Paolo

Hi Andreas, all,

[changing the subject to reflect the discussion character]

Andreas Mantke wrote:

>> it is very interesting to read this criteria and compare it with the git
>> log of COOL. It seemed even this Github repo (project) didn't  attract
>> the number of volunteers, which are requested in the decision proposal.
>

Just to clarify - the attic decision talks about developers (volunteer
or not - should not make a difference).

The ESC proposal, on which this is based, considers Online to be of
medium complexity. To be able to maintain that code over longer
periods of time, 3 developers where deemed necessary.

So any comparison should count all commits I guess (that also makes
evaluation much easier - just run a git shortlog -n -s).

The last part of this 'communication strategy' reached me in private on
July, 3rd at 7.29pm, when I was told that I should contribute objective
reason / points to the debate around LOOL and the decision about its
atticization for LibreOffice Online.

And thanks for keeping the conversation here constructive indeed.

I suspect what happens was adherence to the board communication best
practices, which recommends to take bits of the conversation, which
are of no particular public interest, private.

mmm, another take would recognize those messages as an intention to control the discussion in certain way.

This is a list with more than 200 subscribers - every not-so-relevant
email that people don't need to read, because it wasn't sent to the
list (or every email at least without a fullquote), leaves our
community more time & energy to do fun & productive work on the
project.

I dedicate my time an energy in what I care, no need someone to tell me what should I do.

Hi Andreas,

It's odd you say that as IIRC Mr Meeks said that since they move the
project to Microsoft GitHub they had more contributors.

Are you by any chance able to substantiate your statement?

I made a short research on the commits of about the last four month (the
board decision has also only a three month period in mind).

So lets have a look on the commits of the last four month of the fork
(without the localization work, copied from Weblate):

* March 2022:

- 4 volunteers, one of them was already for long time active in the
LibreOffice design team
- work done: two lines in a readme, some lines of JS, CSS and icons

* April 2022:

- 4 volunteers, one of them is the long time active design team member,
another one is a current member of the board with an JS one liner
- work done: unify ui naming menubar js file, docker image build script,
CSS and the one line in a JS file

* May 2022:

- 2 volunteers, one of them is the long time active design team member
- work done: CSS

* June 2022:

- 2 volunteers, one of them is the long time active design team member
- work done: CSS and an icon

That doesn't seem like much to me.

If that would be the level necessary to avoid to archiving LOOL then it would be very easy.

Noticeable: except the long time LibreOffice design contributor the
volunteers committed only a very few patches and were only in one month
active (without one of them, who submitted another patch in a second
month, a further icon).

I guess we could set this a baseline metrics for keeping LOOL repository open.

It seemed there is a big interest to set high barriers in that area and
to block initiative.

The condition applied are IMHO unfair as it sends out a message that could discourage many to even trying.

The fact that the promoters of the vote in the ESC and the board didn't even sent out a notification about what was about to happen surely doesn't sends out the message that they wanted supporter of LOOL to have a fair chance of reviving the project.

Even the number of voters in favour of that decision are fewer than
those required to pass the barrier :wink:

Yep.

As stated in my answer to the "decision", it just needs to be re-run
with a text that would allow the community a chance to do something.

Are you anyway continuing to prepare a version of LOOL that could be
presented a candidate to start creating a community around it?

I'm working on that too, but that need some more time. I'm happy, if
someone wants to join me and create e.g. a docker build from the source.

Do you need technical help, computing resources, both?

I wouldn't know from where to start in building it from source (sorry can't do everything) but maybe some community members with more experience than me could help out?

Happy to lend you some resources on my infrastructure if that's what you need.

And what I've learned within the communication during the last week(s).
There is no open communication and part of the game is to lead you by
the nose.

Could you elaborate on that?

I'm not sure I fully grasp the meaning of the above sentences.

The last part of this 'communication strategy' reached me in private on
July, 3rd at 7.29pm, when I was told that I should contribute objective
reason / points to the debate around LOOL and the decision about its
atticization for LibreOffice Online. And just some hours later on July,
4th, 3.11am the results of the decision were published on this list.
I had also the impression that I'm in a extra supervision here (and with
private emails).

Odd that also Daniel said he received similar emails.

Not sure if it's someone being overzealous in applying the 'communication strategy' or a way of sending another type of message.

And as we are saying in Germany: Der Fisch stinkt vom Kopfe her.

  That's the same saying we use in Italy but it's not clear what you
mean with it or to what/whom you are referring to.

Hope the above helped a bit.

It's very useful information but what would help even more is for the wider community to tell us clearly what they want.

... and naturally to see the result of your effort.

Regards,
Andreas

Ciao

Paolo

Oh, of course not only Daniel and Andreas got those bad boy badges. When I was wondering why I described the TW gov forked OxOOL to start another NDCODFWeb project for TW gov use it could be distorted to “make TDF maintain LOOL for TW gov”, our Great Leader has also warned me “to be constructive” (some other interesting questions: why warning in private, and if the one who distorted my descriptions got a warning or a good boy badge or not?). Not very sure if what is the standard of “constructive” of our Great Leader but I wonder if I have collected three bad boy badges maybe I would be fucked by the Great Leader again as in the last term of BoD.

I’ll be surprised if TDF will not rule the world under the leadership of our Great Leader who makes the board great again!

Yeah, this one is another “unconstructive” comment. I guess I’ll get the bad boy badge myself and I will have two (or maybe GL wants to send me more?). When issuing the bad boy badge to me please remember to wear your masks amd gloves since I’m having 91 Divoc running in my body now.

F

Paolo Vecchi <paolo.vecchi@documentfoundation.org> 於 2022年7月8日 週五 06:12 寫道:

Hi Daniel,

The long arm of the supervisor reaches several of us who dared to support the proposal to reopen the repo. In my case, trying to point out what can be said and what cannot.

That's not good at all.

Indeed.

Have you received these types of notifications previously?

Yep, from the very beginning of previous term. Several times, several people.

Do you know of others that received communications that are meant to
dissuade people from expressing their legitimate opinions?

I have received some comments that imply that it is. So I encourage all those who have gone through similar situations to express their opinions. Even former directors.

Would you, and anyone else that received similar communications, be
willing to send a complaint to the CoC team or a trusted director for
evaluation?

Sure. Anything to have a better environment for us all.

Hi all,

(...)

The last part of this 'communication strategy' reached me in private on
July, 3rd at 7.29pm, when I was told that I should contribute objective
reason / points to the debate around LOOL and the decision about its
atticization for LibreOffice Online.

And thanks for keeping the conversation here constructive indeed.

it seemed there is a lack of understanding on communication.

This comment could be seen in different ways:

a) it's a toxic praise

b) it's an unwanted review

c) it's treating the author like a pupil and rate the text with a school
note.

But in all cases the message send to the receiver is not positive.

Thus I'd recommend to stop such comments (in public or private).

Regards,
Andreas

Hi all,

although the July, 2022 is not finished yet, a short update on the
amount of volunteer contributors to the fork of LibreOffice Online:

(...)
So lets have a look on the commits of the last four month of the fork
(without the localization work, copied from Weblate):

* March 2022:

- 4 volunteers, one of them was already for long time active in the
LibreOffice design team
- work done: two lines in a readme, some lines of JS, CSS and icons

* April 2022:

- 4 volunteers, one of them is the long time active design team member,
another one is a current member of the board with an JS one liner
- work done: unify ui naming menubar js file, docker image build script,
CSS and the one line in a JS file

* May 2022:

- 2 volunteers, one of them is the long time active design team member
- work done: CSS

* June 2022:

- 2 volunteers, one of them is the long time active design team member
- work done: CSS and an icon

Noticeable: except the long time LibreOffice design contributor the
volunteers committed only a very few patches and were only in one month
active (without one of them, who submitted another patch in a second
month, a further icon).

Here are the 'numbers' for July, 2022:

- 1 volunteer
- work done: small css fix and a typo fix in a markdown file.

Regards,
Andreas

Hi Andreas,

thanks for keeping us up to date.

Here are the 'numbers' for July, 2022:

- 1 volunteer
- work done: small css fix and a typo fix in a markdown file.

Any progress on your version of LOOL?

Is there a repository where the community can check the progress and start contributing to?

Regards,
Andreas

Ciao

Paolo

Hi Paolo, all,

Hi Andreas,

thanks for keeping us up to date.

Here are the 'numbers' for July, 2022:

- 1 volunteer
- work done: small css fix and a typo fix in a markdown file.

Any progress on your version of LOOL?

Yes. I updated it with the available patches, worked on some further
updates and am currently running a Docker build from source with the
available script on openSUSE from the current status.

I created already one docker file about two weeks ago from the status at
that time.

Is there a repository where the community can check the progress and
start contributing to?

Yes.

https://github.com/freeonlineoffice/online

Contributions and help welcome :wink:

You can ping me (drop an email), if you want to join me.

Kind regards,
Andreas

Hi all,

We still have this page on the site:

https://www.libreoffice.org/download/libreoffice-online/

...which has been the same for a very long time. We could update it to say that we're considering the future of LOOL (linking to this mailing list post), and see if people are interested in contributing. What do people think?

Mike

the existence of such a version.

Hi Daniel, hi all,

Hi all,

We still have this page on the site:

https://www.libreoffice.org/download/libreoffice-online/

...which has been the same for a very long time. We could update it to
say that we're considering the future of LOOL (linking to this mailing
list post), and see if people are interested in contributing. What do
people think?

Mike

From my POV, yes. At least to show that there are people interested in
the existence of such a version.

You could join the work on that project currently on Github:
https://github.com/freeonlineoffice/online

I plan to move the work to the LibreOffice project ressources back
later. Currently I don't want to work under the sword of Damocles on TDF
ressources and had to move forth and back again.

And there is no shortage of tasks from different kind. Thus every
helping hand is very welcome! :wink:

Regards,
Andreas

I wish I could but, unfortunately, that task is out of my scope.

However, it’s important to highlight that there’s an ongoing work.

Hi Daniel,

I think there is wide field of tasks available, not only tasks for
hacking on source code. And also doing smaller task will help to drive
the project forward.

Best,
Andreas

Oh, I had not understood it that way. If so, count me in.

El 30/8/22 a las 13:01, Andreas Mantke escribió:

Hi Daniel,

I think there is wide field of tasks available, not only tasks for
hacking on source code. And also doing smaller task will help to drive
the project forward.

Best,
Andreas

Am 29.08.22 um 21:59 schrieb Daniel A. Rodriguez:

I wish I could but, unfortunately, that task is out of my scope.

However, it’s important to highlight that there’s an ongoing work.

El 29 de agosto de 2022 3:02:33 p. m. GMT-03:00, Andreas Mantke
maand@gmx.de escribió:

Hi Daniel, hi all,

Am 29.08.22 um 14:51 schrieb drodriguez@libreoffice.org:

El 29.08.2022 07:44, Mike Saunders escribió:

Hi all, We still have this page on the site:
https://www.libreoffice.org/download/libreoffice-online/
…which has been the same for a very long time. We could
update it to say that we’re considering the future of LOOL
(linking to this mailing list post), and see if people are
interested in contributing. What do people think? Mike

From my POV, yes. At least to show that there are people
interested in the existence of such a version.

You could join the work on that project currently on Github:
https://github.com/freeonlineoffice/online

I plan to move the work to the LibreOffice project ressources back
later. Currently I don’t want to work under the sword of Damocles on TDF
ressources and had to move forth and back again.

And there is no shortage of tasks from different kind. Thus every
helping hand is very welcome! :wink:

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

Free Software Advocate

Plone add-on developer

My blog: http://www.amantke.de/blog

Hi Daniel,

thanks for your reply. I'll add issues to the project thus you (and
other volunteers) could look for suitable tasks.

Best,
Andreas