> -----Original Message----- > From: Peter Kovacs [mailto:pe...@apache.org] > Sent: Sunday, November 24, 2019 11:28 AM > To: dev@openoffice.apache.org > Subject: Re: volunteer activity tracking > > > On 24.11.19 09:30, Jörg Schmidt wrote: > >> Normally we discuss to get a consensus. Crucial votes are > >> out-of-favour. > >> This is the only way to keep the community together. > > No, that is only a way of unification. > > But if there is no unification, voices have not been taken > sufficiently > into account. > > If this happens to often, people will go away, and the community is > diminished.
That's not gonna happen. That's happened. Lots and lots of former volunteers left the OpenOffice project and either went to LO or turned away from free software. Doesn't it show the weakness of our project that we couldn't even stand up to a newcomer like LO? (Nothing general against LO, only it is not our project. Our task is to ensure the success of AOO.) The example of the ProOO-Box shows how wrong the procedure is in some cases. With OOo, the ProOO box was part of the project, with AOO it was suddenly no longer part of the project, but was declared a "third party" without any substantial reason. At the persistent request of the volunteers, it was explained that the ProOO box could apply as a separate incubator project. Does nobody understand how absurd this proposal was? Does no one understand how it offended volunteers? Of course my answer to Michael is not about the dissent being better, but just about the fact that we have to be willing to learn from our own mistakes and to implement improvements. greetings, Jörg --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
