Hi Guy, On 12-12-01, at 19:35 , Guy Waterval <waterval....@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Louis, > > 2012/12/1 Louis Suárez-Potts <lui...@gmail.com> > >> Hi >> On 12-12-01, at 15:52 , Guy Waterval <waterval....@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> A new doc mailing list is absolutely necessary. It could offer an >>> alternative to the odf authors solution, as this group is the >> documentation >>> area of LibreOffice. Even if people are totally correct there, we have to >>> be realistic, the conditions are not good there for people working on an >>> apache documentation project. >> >> From prior experience and also from current, I'd submit that a new list >> for this purpose is needed. I'd also see if former OO documentation writers >> want to participate. Of course, to hit my usual refrain, I'm also as always >> interested to learn if we can work with other implementations of ODF based >> on OO code. >> >> FWIW, when Sun was sponsoring OOo, the Doc project gained productive >> vigour under Frank Peters, of Sun/Oracle. He brought to bear his >> professional abilities. He also sought out non-Sun/Oracle community >> members. It was a good, multilingual project. Clayton worked with him on it. >> > > Happy to see that you support the creation of a doclist. By the way, it's > not my intention to criticize the work accomplished by Keith and Prabha on > the odf authors website. My personal preference is also definitly a printed > documentation, but I think that an online doc under ALV2.0 is obligatory, > we have no choice, and if we support and help the team of Ricardo, we have > a real chance to get it. If we had a dedicated list for the documentation, > it would be also more easy to support a printed variant with people who as > me are interested by this way. > > A+ > -- > gw > >> >> I think you are responding to things I did not write nor intend. My fault. Let me clarify…. First, my connection with OOo and the documentation project, which I initiated with Scott Carr back in 2002, giving it to him upon his request, is of long standing. Second, I quite support the current license regime and structure. My point about former doc. writers was not to reach out to Authors; I actually had not considered that construal. I did not really think of them as being part of the Documentation project in the same way that Frank was, or earlier, Scott—or as many others were. But of course, I'm an idiot, as there were many who very happily worked with Authors, and they had by far the greater shine, so I can see where you are coming from. However…. Neither Frank nor Clayton had anything to do with Authors group; nor did I. In fact, I had a long historical friction with them for reasons of license and approach. But that's ancient history and in the sum, I was happier to see them contribute and to add to the OOo ecosystem; so was Frank and so was, I believe, Clayton. The Authors group did not include anyone from Sun or Oracle. But again, this is ancient history best left done. Frank was quite committed to online work, too, and there was, in fact, a lot of done by Oracle under his leadership. It's Oracle property. I asked when AOO was just newborn—last year—if Oracle, my former employer, would have those files available for us. My hope was that as the work was proprietary and owned by Oracle, it might be made open and donated to the OO community. Or bought. But nothing came of that entreaty. Louis
