Re: [native-lang] Position of Native-Lang and other non-coding parts of the communty [was: New template project]

Hi,

I am not a Project Lead and of late don't have any substantial
contributions to the i18n/l10n bits of OO.o. Perhaps I am not
qualified to comment. However, I *use* OO.o and *know* that OO.o and
the NLC is one of the strongest reasons why organisations and folks
switch to using FLOSS in their infrastructure.

On 12/3/06, Bernhard Dippold <[email protected]> wrote:

[snipping a lot of content]

> I don't want OpenOffice.org to be divided in subprojects where nobody feels to be part of the whole but only of it's *own* project. Many community members are part of several projects and subscribed to a lot of lists. If we all work on interaction between projects and idividuals this will improve communication - and depending on the reaction of the addressed we'll be able to distinguish between inattentiveness and intentional ignorance.

In private and off list conversations with Charles and Louis I have
more than once hinted at two things:

[*] "Walled garden" : where it related to various subgroups (and even
groups) "talking" to each other. I will not point out to other FLOSS
projects that do i18n and comment that they are doing a better job.
Each project has its own complexities and demands on the developers
and non-developer contributors. However, if a constant bridge of
communication is not maintained then each entity feels short-sold.
That is not healthy in the long run and does a lot to suck the
momentum and the enthusiasm

[*] Opacity : where it relates to process and protocols for
contribution of code (and content) to OO.o

Internecine feuds amongst subgroups in a project is something that
keeps on happening, let's not encourage it to a level where
communication breaks down and thus the product and then the project
sustains irrecoverable damage.

Regards
Sankarshan


-- 
From Untruth, lead me to the Truth,
From Darkness, Lead me towards the Light,
From Death, Lead me to Life Eternal