Date: prev next · Thread: first prev next last
2020 Archives by date, by thread · List index

Op 14-10-2020 om 15:52 schreef Marc Paré:
Hi Telesto,

Thanks for the large reply, of which, from what I gather is that you are
saying that the definition of "Community" can be viewed from many

True. And one of those is Commercial Company's sharing a limited version under the label "Community Edition". They obvious example being Visual Studio Community Edition.
Not sure how many more examples there are.

The other problem is that's bit of empty shell. Not sure what community edition should represent. What edition part entails. Editions point to difference. A common approach is to see community edition as
functional limited edition (look at VS Community).

Also they community is largely, formed by same people who build the Enterprise Edition. The Enterprise Edition is more or less they Community Edition. So they edition is actually a LTS variant with some extra's (and professional support) So they core difference isn't they edition, but the support and area for deployment (Enterprises environments versus home environments)

Another issue I have is that I don't see a actual (coherent, cohesive, harmonic) community. It are lots of lose fractions (decentralized). They developers are a pretty tight group of people (with few of QA). And maybe the key figures at Infra/Marketing/UX. Lets call it the core family. GSoC students, QA members are simply bunch of people scrambled together (maybe the same at Ask) Coming, going, doing whatever they want. So they community is build out of core and number of people floating around. There are no 'common' values or something like that within the community(if you ask me). There a quite a number of vision about what LibreOffice by TDF represents.

Everybody has it's own reason for contributing. And even their own vision what LibreOffice is :-). From the perspective of they eco-system partners TDF might be intermediary between different contributors (to share code. And an giving a testing user base. Other group of members at TDF sees LibrOffice as independent project, with it's own purpose. So TDF board could disagree with eco-system partners. There is a group who approaches it from FLOSS perspective.  They might object against edition and say marketing eco-system partners inside FLOSS product.

There is discussion about LibreOffice being a project or product. For they eco-systems partners it's certainly also a product (you have to buy a license). They have customers, customer wants a tool. They product delivers they tool they want. The code changes also flow into LibreOffice TDF edition.

I - personally - see mission/ purpose (partly) in serving need of users. So delivering a (free) market standard open source Office Suite. From my perspective it's even possible to have QA committee at TDF body in an attempt focus more on bugs ruining the user experience. And that LibreOffice includes listing to 'the people'
To make LibreOffice a nice product to use.

Not only a 'project' which - say - only developers enjoy.  And TDF - as a body - should be able to 'complain' at eco-system partners introducing to many new bugs, without carrying enough to solve them. Currently eco-system partners 'care only about bugs their customers care about' so every flaw they introduce but outside that scope while likely linger around. Of course is this a 'simplification' and put harshly. The reality is more defuse, multilayered and complex. If somebody introduces QR feature, rendered as SVG. And it doesn't export well to DOCX. Who did it? SVG broken by someone else (or never worked before). Is the company supposed to fix that on their budget? Even if this isn't a need for the customer who liked they QR feature? If LibreOffice at TDF simply a pipe for code flow across. No problem. If LibreOffice at TDF also stands for quality product, this might tends to an issue. And maybe even TDF should (financially contribute) to solve it? Of should we wait until a customer appears at who needs QR codes at DOCX export? This would imply a fresh supply of money, instead of consuming TDF or company budget.
And the dilemma's are born :-).
Result is LibreOffice at TDF riddled with bugs waiting for a customer to be paid for :-). Instead of eco-system partners investing upfront (and asking a higher price for their product; as more feature complete) They actually can't do that, because the don't get a proper return on investment. Because there work is immediately also found in LibreOffice at TDF (which can be downloaded for free). And has the same stuff :-( So TDF has to invest, is in principle possible. Now the problem moves to TDF. How can TDF by financial self sufficient over the long term? They donations are nice, but likely not enough.

The community appears to be 'working' - being in silent agreement - until a topic is on the table which hurts the balance. The cracks in burst within the "community" become visible. It keeps surprising me how people managed to work with this for such a long time ;-).

The whole point is nobody has a clue what LibreOffice at TDF exactly stands for. So everybody is reading their story into it. They eco-system partners use TDF as pipe to share code and use LibreOffice is a 'testing ground'. To get their product tested until proven secure enough for Enterprise environments. In this vision/model QA is by volunteers is pretty cheap replacement for QA done by eco-system partners themselves with paid employees.
They won't say that out loud, duh!

And members would LibreOffice at TDF to rock. However if LibreOffice becomes to good, what's the remaining proposition for the eco-system partners? The must compete with a rocking LibreOffice supplied by TDF. So I sometimes suspect reason keep it broken. Not saying this actually the case! I simply don't know.

needs to message in a clearer way on the website as to its definition of
"community", just to make it crystal clear. We all come from different
cultures, I am Canadian, and in particular French-Canadian, so, my
interpretation of "community" will be nuanced by my cultural background.
However, if a clear definition on the TDF and LibreOffice offers a clear
message of the definition of "community" then it can be treated as our
I assume we have the same interpretation of community (except in the Western individualistic society) this might differ from expression of community in Asia. Most of us pretty outspoken (and direct about how we see thing). So we might less inclined to make sacrifices to for the great good of the community. Hierarchy pretty important in Japan. Disagreeing openly pretty disrespectful. This behavior would make  job at BoD at TDF a lot easier. However maybe wrong decisions are made in Japan (because boss always right). Or their more sabotaging going on. But not a cultural expert and no real life experiences.
So stereotypes, hear say and such..

The major concern is that I'm missing a coherent, consistent community. A unity. Only fractions of people working together as far as the common interest goes. However everybody has it's own agenda, motivation, goals and ambitions.  I'm doing QA for TDF for fun and in they interest of they users of LibreOffice TDF edition. That they eco-system partners also profiting from it fine.  I prefer not to see myself as an unpaid employee; extension of they eco-system partners company. In that case I'm feeling used.

I personally prefer more of a focus on user experience/ product quality.  Even if this include bugs which less of an concern of they eco-system partners (as their customers don't care for whatever reason). I still assume those would benefit too, except the economic cost/benefit ratio doesn't add up in they eco-system partners calculations (which is in their right). But I sometimes would like TDF making a stance, that get it done anyhow. With stick (pushing/demanding) & carrot (money). Say TDF being a 'force' of influence. Currently it's slightly to cosy integration between TDF and eco-system partners at the top. Catering the needs of eco-system partners (they eco-system partners might disagree ;-). It's my impression.. Could be wrong. And of course, eco-system partners are important. So I see LibreOffice at TDF as a separate entity with it's a separate purpose/ values (however I don't have clear picture here)

I also don't have feeling of 'belonging' to the LibreOffice community, even being a member and around for a long time. But I'm only a newbie, compared with they long term members. Yes, I do participate and I think I get along pretty well (even being a pain in the ass once in a while). But to say their is a shared common (aligned) interest..

They community doesn't exist (currently) and/or isn't harmonic ;-). Which makes Community Edition bit ironic.  It's a pretty special interpretation of community, IMHO I would use a description with less connotations free: a group of people working together on the same project for various reasons and interests. FWIW: I'm only single voice, so maybe just me. Note: I do see marketing presenting/ picturing LibreOffice as a community; and that's they formal narrative. It's actually far more complicated in reality. This of course my perception.


To unsubscribe e-mail to:
Posting guidelines + more:
List archive:
Privacy Policy:


Privacy Policy | Impressum (Legal Info) | Copyright information: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images on this website are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is licensed under the Mozilla Public License (MPLv2). "LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use thereof is explained in our trademark policy.