Date: prev next · Thread: first prev next last
2011 Archives by date, by thread · List index

Le 2011-01-07 05:17, Christoph Noack a écrit :

Hi Christoph:

Nevertheless, what I don't understand is, that many of the other
comments within mails - also by Sophie, or Bernhard, or other long-time
contributors - are missed or treated differently. And although we do
need "a breath of fresh air" (a.k.a. community), this support may be as
valuable as "wiki content". We are happy to share our experience.

I certainly agree with this. On the contrary, people with obvious experience and talents are respected. This is what brings immense value to the group. I am happy to see people with experience showing initiative and giving us a sense of direction (the list of tasks in preparation for the release of the distros is, again, the perfect example). If newcomers present ideas that have been tried and failed, then they should be commended for offering. Participation and exchange of ideas is a healthy thing and should be encouraged.

We don't need formal leads, we need people able to act and be
responsible in front of the whole community or the whole project if you
prefer. If somebody claims to be member of the website team, whatever he
prefers to do, he should work on what *has to be done*. It's just a
matter of commitment to the group. You can lead a task one day and not
the other, and it reflects more how an open source project is working.


Personally, I would see leads more as in a mentorship role to the teams.
If the teams get too way off track, the lead would step in and add words
of wisdom as well as play an active role in role modelling. There is no
need to vote on any lead, leaders just shine by themselves and promote
community growth.

Absolutely! I also prefer the terms "guidance", "support" or
"mentoring". Although the current situation makes it a bit hard to
"shine by themselves" - you already stated that many of you are new to
LibreOffice, and you don't know the experience of other people. It gets
an "chicken and egg" problem as we can see on some mailing lists :-)

In our LibO/TDF situation, I am fine to (temporarily) highlight a few
people who are known specialists for certain topics (within our
community), and are also known to be heavily involved since quite some
time. Would that be helpful? What do you think?


I don't really think this would be a good idea as this would then become subjective and contentious. People are probably already shuddering at the thought of not being mentioned on such list. Maybe provide the means for people to check to see how some have contributed: how we go about seeing how people have contributed; what areas have been contributed; what areas are in need of contribution. Rather than relying on one person's assessment of contribution, people could then see by themselves, in our meritocracy, how people have contributed to the project. When people have the tool set to work with, they are more satisfied.



Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to
List archive:
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***


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.