Rob, IMHO "the project" is "on track" the community just needs to discuss some more things and sort them out. It is just that I don't even think it's required to provide proof-points based on "questionable" analytics at this point in time. There is a saying in this regards "I only believe in statistics that I doctored myself" and that's certainly one reason why I feel suspicious about these kind of analysis :)
Cheers Daniel On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 10:18 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: > dsh <[email protected]> wrote on 06/02/2011 04:05:38 PM: > >> >> IMHO you should not discuss or question the LO community size >> respective its vitality in any way at this place. That's certainly not >> the scope of the OpenOffice Apache incubation proposal anyway. The > > I disagree. The question was raised on the list whether this project was > on track to have a sufficient number of developers to allow this project > to thrive. In my analysis I commented on two highly relevant comparable > projects, estimating how many core developers they have. IMHO, this is > **highly** relevant. > > If you or anyone else would like to propose a different analysis leading > to a different number, then I'd welcome as well. > > -Rob > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
