Enable TDF to contribute more code to LibreOffice with in-house developers to address our donors specific needs

Hi *,

looking at this thread, we start to run in circles.

My understanding was, that Paolo volunteered to write-up a more
detailed proposal, including goals (short-term and possibly
long-term).

I agree with several other directors (current and upcoming) that this
would be very useful to have, to base a decision on.

So lets wait for that document; in this sub-thread there was no new
arguments in a while. I suggest we retire it.

A few quick comments, no need to discuss further:

Paolo Vecchi wrote:

> The difference is that we already have a mentor (actually several
> mentors in several areas), while you suggest a strategic decision -

We recently employed only 1 mentor.
No one else has been employed in that specific role.

TDF employed, and still employs, several mentors in various roles &
overlapping responsibilities (including development).

Those were, if my memory serves me well, unanimously wanted.

It would be great if members of the board of directors, with their
TDF hat on, would explain clearly why they seem to be opposed to
employing in-house developers.

The opposition seems to be about the process, and about putting the
means before the end. There was BTW a constructive side-thread with
some thoughts on how/where a salaried developer at TDF could be
beneficial, with contributions from all sides of the aisle.

Best,

-- Thorsten

Hi Paolo,

Paolo Vecchi píše v St 16. 02. 2022 v 11:16 +0100:

It would be great if members of the board of directors, with their
TDF
hat on, would explain clearly why they seem to be opposed to
employing
in-house developers.

I have never said I am opposed (and never said I'm supportive) to
employing in-house developers, because I don't have enough information
to make an informed decision yet.

I have said two things:

* I'd prefer hiring development mentors, rather than developers,
  because I am convinced that that is the best way how to scale as
  an organization responsible for the source code, and I see less
  potential problems with that

* I am unhappy how the proposal to hire developers was and is being
  pushed, with lots of wishful thinking, and on the other hand without
  outlining potential problems, without proper discussion of the
  pro's & con's of this or other solutions, and without outlining
  details of tasking and management of the developers.

In other words, my view is that the "let's first hire 2 developers, and
then see" approach is irresponsible, and we should have a plan first.

That is why I am so grateful to those who have constructively
contributed to the debate, and particularly to those who have added
their thoughts as answers or responses to my questions!

All the best,
Kendy

Hi Kendy,

In other words, my view is that the "let's first hire 2 developers, and
then see" approach is irresponsible, and we should have a plan first.

I would agree with you if that were the case.

The bullet points of the proposal already presented some reasons and started delineating a plan for it, many contributions to the conversation added to that plan more details.

Email threads show that concepts may be difficult to follow but if you read through the emails you would notice that I proposed that the team and the suitable developers will start shaping what we could be focus on from the beginning.

As already said, if we find an excellent a11y developer and one that has already got experience in fixing bugs in some unloved areas then the initial choices would be already made for us. If we only find "generic" C++ developers then naturally we'll have to train them in specific areas which the team will identify.

Naturally, as said in this thread, the developers need to be initially quite flexible and learn to cover different areas including QA and mentorship.

While the team adjust and we discover specific preferences for those developers then they could focus in an area more than others so that they can express their full potential.

Is the "plan" a bit clearer for you now?

I'll find the time to collate together the feedback received by many that help in completing the plan.
Just give me a bit of time this is an activity I do by donating my time to TDF without expecting an economical return so I have to tend to other things as well.

Ciao

Paolo

Hi Paolo,

Paolo Vecchi píše v St 16. 02. 2022 v 15:04 +0100:

Is the "plan" a bit clearer for you now?

Thank you, sounds much more positive this way.

I'd still call it more an "outline" than a "plan", but I can see
potential for the development mentoring in that too, so I can imagine
we can agree something great for TDF together as the Board.

I'll find the time to collate together the feedback received by many
that help in completing the plan.

The devil is always in the detail, but I'm all ears & patient too,
please do take your time - I'm really looking forward to the plan.

Again - thank you!

All the best,
Kendy