Hello,
in another thread, @PaoloVecchi added four links that caught my attention:
- NLnet; LibreOffice P2P
- NLnet; Collabora Online/LibreOffice Accessibility
- NLnet; LibreOffice/Collabora Online typography
- NLnet; LibreOffice CRDT
I would love to understand more about these projects.
One thing that is a bit irritating is that the project pages use the LibreOffice brand sometimes in a, let’s call it, “creative way”. We all should stick to the trademark policy TDF has put in place and to which a Guidelines and Best Practices wiki page exist.
That aside, I am curious to learn more about the projects.
First: Is the decision to freeze the LibreOffice Online repository compatible with seeking for funding with another nonprofit for LibreOffice Online? Shouldn’t the repository be opened again before?
Second: If I recall correctly, one of the proposals in a Munich in-person meeting was to send a bigger chunk of TDF’s funds to NLnet so they could do LibreOffice projects. I remember a heated debate around this and now I wonder if the funds would have been used for these projects. NLnet was mentioned in an earlier board meeting already, but I didn’t find further details.
Let’s also look at the projects individually:
In the description, WASM seems to be refered to as “The improved LibreOffice Online”, even if the project ran for two years after “an Online move” and after LibreOffice Online was frozen as per a board decision using the back-then chairperson’s tie-breaking vote. I see the TDF product name and trademark, and the TDF wiki as “The project’s own website”, so maybe TDF should start to consider to actively do something with the code?
This project started more than two years after “an Online move”. It mentions Collabora Online, but clearly shows a “LibreOffice Online” logo, more than two years after LibreOffice Online was frozen as per a board decision using the back-then chairperson’s tie-breaking vote. Can anyone unwind the confusion?
Paolo Vecchi was put under a conflict of interest on LibreOffice Online. This is already very problematic for several reasons. One interesting detail here are comments in a public board meeting like:
- Paolo’s personal and business situation ignored so far
- failed to establish a business relation with Collabora and CIB
The typography proposal shows the company another board member is affiliated with as running the project. Unless we want to establish double standards, there is something really wrong here that we need to address urgently. Why would one board member have a conflict, but not another one who seeks funding using the LibreOffice name and an edited logo? In addition: Should that board member have voted on the CoI declaration, it is very likely void altogether.
How does this proposal differ from the p2p proposal TDF budget 75.000 € for one year later? Do they complement each other? Are they mutually exclusive? The NLnet project seems to have been in place a year before the TDF proposal was made, but I don’t see any reference to it, so I am curious.
Thanks
Florian