Hi Thorsten and all,
now that we have more information on the matter we can clarify a few points.
We know that and this is what was funded:
See also the original awarding post:
https://web.archive.org/web/20200921134658/https://nlnet.nl/project/LibreOfficeP2P/
The application and the awarding happened while the board was working to satisfy MIchael’s request to have a marketing plan promoting the valuable members of the ecosystem in exchange of finally making available LibreOffice Online to the community in an usable way instead of playing with what has been described in comments and board minutes as “artificial scarcity”
You decided not to make the board aware that you were awarded funds explicitly targeted to improve and add features to LibreOffice Online at the time.
When it seemed like months of effort from the board and the marketing team delivered a good draft the marketing plan Michael decided to breach the agreement he had with the board and forked LibreOffice Online.
Even then you decided to say nothing about the funding to improve LibreOffice Online or to step in to deliver the contributions that you were being funded to develop.
At the time you were still working for CIB and started presenting the project funded to improve LibreOffice Online as LibreOffice WebAssembly. Then you setup allotropia and apparently the funding moved there but no changes were made to the purpose of the funding.
The information we received state that it happened in 2022 so you deceived the board and the community for 2 years confirming what previously stated.
You were fully aware of the issues with LibreOffice Online when you applied for and when you got granted the funds to improve LibreOffice Online.
You were fully aware that the scope of the questions in relation to LibreOffice Online were made to determine if it was a community project hosted by TDF with the scope of providing the community and all that wanted to use it a “user-centered free/libre open source software” as from our statutes or a commercial project benefiting from TDF’s brands and marketing reach.
Once we got the answer to that question you still promoted your project as a community effort and refused to clarify the scope of it even after the recent experience with LibreOffice Online.
Before the offer to clarify what LOWA was going to become for the community and the offer to find ways for TDF to fund the efforts, in January 2022 when the board was unaware you were still funded to improve LibreOffice Online, the 16/02/2021 I’ve answered to Michael’s comment in relation an article about LOWA stating:
I’m sure you would agree with me that we should avoid a future situation where:
- a project is presented to the community as being made in partnership with TDF
- the community expects for that project to be made available for free under the TDF umbrella
- the main contributor withdraws the project from TDF’s community as it’s now its only mean to make money
It’s a very hypothetical situation but I believe we should set expectations right from the beginning and we should set rules so that there is a good and open relationship between TDF and the ecosystem but with clear boundaries which avoid future unpleasant misunderstanding.
Anyone is welcome to develop their own solutions based on LibreOffice Technologies but that should not give them the right to be called part of “The LibreOffice team” or to claim endorsements from TDF.
Even then you refused to clarify if your project is a commercial effort to create your own product based on LibreOffice Technologies or a community effort that relases an improved LibreOffice Online for all to use.
The 25/08/2021, while still being funded to improve LibreOffice Online, you clarified your intentions about it by announcing the partnership with Collabora Productivity:
It’s only in 2024 that the scope of the project has been clarified and it is now reflected in the page where the original LibreOffice P2P project, that was supposed to improve LibreOffice Online, is redirecting to:
That would have been the correct way to present your project to get funding and to establish a clear relationship between your project and the community but you choose otherwise.
During all these years and also while you were the board chairperson you pushed to kill LibreOffice Online, you voted to put it in the “attic”, attacked and badmouthed all those that wanted clear agreements between commercial entities and TDF, those that presented facts and evidence showing that certain behaviour were at best unethical and damaging both TDF and the community and even lead an investigation to find a fellow member of the board in CoI with LibreOffice Online while keeping secret your clear CoI.
The only moment when you wanted clarity is when Michael proposed in the ESC to put LibreOffice Online in the “attic”:
https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice/2022-June/089018.html
support the idea to get some clarity here (Thorsten)
Now that we clarified the situation with LibreOffice Online and the improved version that has never delivered let’s clarify another project to avoid once again the same issues in the future.
Have you received funding to develop LibreOffice CRDT to make it a community project hosted and supported by TDF following its statutes for the benefit of the whole community or it will only become a product of the subsidiary of Collabora Productivity?
https://nlnet.nl/project/LibreOffice-CRDT/
Could you ask NLNet to adjust the project page to reflect what your plans are?
Once again, TDF welcomes projects based on LibreOffice Technology but it is important to clarify the relationship between the projects run by a commercial entity and TDF as non for profit organisation as well as setting the expectations for the community and the users.
The community guidelines do not forbid to present facts and evidence and there is more that can be shared if you want to continue the discussion.
I’m not sure after all your done as member and chairman of the board you have ethical and moral grounds to lecture others on community guidelines.
Ciao
Paolo