Well actually the case of the wikipedia article is different, because the adjective that is used for the project whether "dormant" or "moribund" is not in fact actually being referred to the Apache project but to the pre-Apache project. The Apache project is indicated as being a derivative project, and has been given a separate page as such. The issue there is that one or two users (who happen to also be moderators) are very set on considering the Apache project a different project, and not the "successor" of the Oracle project. So it's actually the Oracle project that is being called dormant. I do believe that it is a bit confusing for any normal user that goes to read wikipedia, a lot of simple users don't even realize the history behind this (I myself didn't until just recently, as I've been reading up on the evolution of the project). But it's fairly useless trying to clear it up any, as there are a couple users who are very intent on keeping everything as is, any changes will spark debate (as has already happened). It's probably not worth it...
On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 10:07 PM, Phillip Rhodes <motley.crue....@gmail.com> wrote: > Fair enough. That is the dictionary definition. I was thinking of how > it's used colloquially, which seems > to be more like a synonym for "stagnant." I'd be OK with either > "stagnant" or "stalled", if the change > can be made without someone immediately reverting it. I probably won't do > it myself since I quickly tire > of dicking around with wikipedia edit wars, but I fully support anybody who > does. > > > Phil > > > This message optimized for indexing by NSA PRISM > > On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 3:08 PM, Donald Whytock <dwhyt...@apache.org> > wrote: > > > "Moribund" means "dying". It's a goofy word, yes, which means it's an > > attention-getting word, which means people will look at it and say, "What > > the hell does THAT mean?" and focus on why someone would call AOO that. > > > > Is "dying" more accurate than "dormant" to describe AOO? "Dying" > suggests > > the project is in decline and will only continue to decline. Does anyone > > here think "dying" is more accurate than, say, "Stalled"? > > > > Don > > > > On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 2:37 PM, Phillip Rhodes < > motley.crue....@gmail.com > > > > > wrote: > > > > > "Moribund" is a goofy word that almost nobody uses in conversation, but > > > it's probably more accurate than "dormant". I've spent enough time > > > goofing around on Wikipedia lately, so, for myself, I'm quite happy to > > > leave it as is, until the 4.1.2 release comes out. At that point, I > > think > > > it's clear that it should then be made "Active". > > > > > > *shrug* > > > > > > > > > Phil > > > > > > This message optimized for indexing by NSA PRISM > > > > > > On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 10:48 AM, Donald Whytock <dwhyt...@apache.org> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > There was a minor skirmish last week over it. Looks like there'll be > > one > > > > this week too...someone changed it to "moribund". > > > > > > > > On Fri, Sep 11, 2015 at 6:54 PM, Phillip Rhodes < > > > motley.crue....@gmail.com > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Sorry, I missed the infobox when I looked at the page. You're > right, > > > > > having "Dormant" there is flat out wrong and very misleading. > > > > > > > > > > I changed it to "Active" just now and added a ref pointer to the > > 4.1.2 > > > > > release schedule that Andrea just provided. I just hope there > aren't > > > > > certain parties with a vested interest in denigrating AOO sitting > > > around > > > > > planning to start a revert war over this. :-( > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Phil > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This message optimized for indexing by NSA PRISM > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Sep 10, 2015 at 10:08 AM, Max Merbald <max.merb...@gmx.de> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Phil, > > > > > > > > > > > > what I meant was the infobox at the top right. In that box it > says > > > that > > > > > > AOO is dormat, which is not correct and which is not in the > > > citations. > > > > > The > > > > > > presence of a citation does not necessry mean that the claimed > info > > > is > > > > in > > > > > > the citation. If people read on the Wikipedia that AOO is > "dormant" > > > > > they'll > > > > > > start looking for different office software. > > > > > > > > > > > > Max > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Am 03.09.2015 um 23:12 schrieb Phillip Rhodes: > > > > > > > > > > > >> I just looked at the Wikipedia page and don't see anything > that's > > - > > > > > >> strictly speaking - incorrect, or lacking citations. IOW, I > don't > > > see > > > > > any > > > > > >> supportable rationale for removing anything that's there, > although > > > one > > > > > >> could question the motives of whoever made it a point to call > out > > > some > > > > > >> concerns about lack of activity in the first paragaph of the > > > article. > > > > > >> Nonetheless, I think any attempt to modify that will face > > > opposition. > > > > > >> > > > > > >> In a related vein, The Guardian recently ran this article titled > > > > > "Should I > > > > > >> Switch From Apache OpenOffice to LibreOffice or Microsoft > Office". > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://www.theguardian.com/technology/askjack/2015/sep/03/switch-openoffice-libreoffice-or-microsoft-office > > > > > >> > > > > > >> I don't know if there's any easy way to counter this narrative > > > that's > > > > > >> spreading through the press, about AOO being > > dead/dormant/whatever, > > > or > > > > > how > > > > > >> LO is clearly "the winner", but it's definitely unfortunate to > see > > > > this > > > > > >> kind of stuff spread around so widely. :-( > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> Phil > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> This message optimized for indexing by NSA PRISM > > > > > >> > > > > > >> On Thu, Sep 3, 2015 at 4:55 PM, Louis Suárez-Potts < > > > lui...@gmail.com> > > > > > >> wrote: > > > > > >> > > > > > >> Hi Max, > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> On 03 Sep 15, at 16:31, Max Merbald <max.merb...@gmx.de> > wrote: > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> Hi there, > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> the Engish Wikipedia claims that AOO is dormant. I can't see > > where > > > > > they > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> have the information from. The sources they use don't say so. I > > > think > > > > > >>> it's > > > > > >>> definitely bad for OpenOffice when people think no more is done > > > about > > > > > it. > > > > > >>> The problem is also that LibreOffice has just published its > > version > > > > 5.0 > > > > > >>> and > > > > > >>> is getting ahead of us. > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> thanks for the alert. > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> Wikipedia is composed by a crowd of editors, and you can change > > the > > > > > entry > > > > > >>> to reflect the facts. > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> So can anyone on this list. Becoming an editor at Wikipedia is > > not > > > > > >>> arduous. > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> Louis > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>>> Max > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > >>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org > > > > > >>>> For additional commands, e-mail: > dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org > > > > > >>> For additional commands, e-mail: > dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org > > > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- John R. D'Orazio
