TDF, the online version, and its missions

Board Discuss
#1

Hi all,

I'm opening a new thread because I would like to clarify a bit my position on why this is necessary for TDF to have an online version and why I think it's possible if we all take a balanced position and listen to each others.

I believe delivering LibreOffice on centralized online services in resource-constrained environments and on Android powered tablets and phones is explicitly part of our mission.
There are a lot of countries in the world where the current ecosystem is not and will never be present. For example health workers in Africa who rely on Android OS almost uniquely to perform their work.

There is a big part of the population which will never pay for support because they *cannot* offer it. For example micro-businesses in France represent 96% [1], SMEs 3.8% and it's only France. There are also journalists, students and pupils over the world, and so on. That should leave enough room for everybody to exist, without preventing TDF to support a big part of the world.

So for me the topic is not do we want to compete each other, but do we want to complete each other. And if we brainstorm on that common goal, I'm sure we will find ways to be beneficial for both the ecosystem and the foundation and that should even broaden the ecosystem. TDF has to take care of those left over users anyway.

Some may reply that it doesn't fulfill the technical part, but to my eyes, if we get room for everyone, community will show up to help filling the gap.

[1] see the black bloc on the left of the page in English:
https://www.insee.fr/en/outil-interactif/5543645/tableau/60_ETP/0.62_ENT

Cheers
Sophie

#2

Hi Sophie, all,

I'm opening a new thread because I would like to clarify a bit my position on why this is necessary for TDF to have an online version and why I think it's possible if we all take a balanced position and listen to each others.

I believe delivering LibreOffice on centralized online services in resource-constrained environments and on Android powered tablets and phones is explicitly part of our mission.

It is a fair choice to believe that. I think not the only valid one.

So for me the topic is not do we want to compete each other, but do we want to complete each other. And if we brainstorm on that common goal,

We see a clear winn-winn currently with Collabora Online.. Not only it is promoting LibreOffice (since clearly based on LibreOffice Technology), of course open source code to the best standards (anyone can join, study, build, contribute, share, fork), with non limited free versions available, and with an open community with many we know.. but it is also allowing the ecosystem to have it's role, as we thought out it would be wonderful when setting up the foundation, to contribute significant to TDF and LibreOffice as a result of the companies investments and risk taking and capabilities to deal with the commercial markets.

I'm sure we will find ways to be beneficial for both the ecosystem and the foundation and that should even broaden the ecosystem.

Yes. Finding balance between ecosystem members and TDF is not easy. In the Autumn of 2020 we learned the hard way that it can be easily broken. So indeed we have to be respectful and considerate.
I cannot believe that there is a clear and conscientious will in TDF to compete with it's own ecosystem. And I agree with you that, also when there is an online under TDF infrastructure (which no one can nor want to forbid, since we have a meritocratic community. And for which we know what is reasonable and asked for to have a sensible fair project) we must have ways to simply not compete with the ecosystem.

And for growing the ecosystem: both mentoring and projects to find new markets/parties that understand the opportunities and want to do some investment are needed. Let's (again) try to focus on work like that, would be my suggestion.

TDF has to take care of those left over users anyway.

Not sure what you mean with that.

Some may reply that it doesn't fulfill the technical part, but to my eyes, if we get room for everyone, community will show up to help filling the gap.

It is encouraging to see, apart from some problems as pointed out by others, enthusiasm. But hmmm..., with all history, discussions and careful working on proposals, I think it is not unfair if I notify that it is somehow late. Then of course: better late then not at all :wink:

Cheers,
Cor

#3

Hi Sophie, all,

I'm opening a new thread because I would like to clarify a bit my position on why this is necessary for TDF to have an online version and why I think it's possible if we all take a balanced position and listen to each others.

I believe delivering LibreOffice on centralized online services in resource-constrained environments and on Android powered tablets and phones is explicitly part of our mission.

It is a fair choice to believe that. I think not the only valid one.

So for me the topic is not do we want to compete each other, but do we want to complete each other. And if we brainstorm on that common goal,

We see a clear winn-winn currently with Collabora Online.. Not only it is promoting LibreOffice (since clearly based on LibreOffice Technology), of course open source code to the best standards (anyone can join, study, build, contribute, share, fork), with non limited free versions available, and with an open community with many we know.. but it is also allowing the ecosystem to have it's role, as we thought out it would be wonderful when setting up the foundation, to contribute significant to TDF and LibreOffice as a result of the companies investments and risk taking and capabilities to deal with the commercial markets.

Win-win is a situation to which we all aspire. However, one of the key pieces in this mutant puzzle is to broaden the ecosystem rather than narrow it. And, in this sense, clear rules and boundaries are necessary.
TDF cannot force the entire mass of LibreOffice users to consume a particular product. It can, however, improve it's work to raise awareness about the importance of contributing (which is not reduced to code) to the community that embraces the project.

I'm sure we will find ways to be beneficial for both the ecosystem and the foundation and that should even broaden the ecosystem.

Yes. Finding balance between ecosystem members and TDF is not easy. In the Autumn of 2020 we learned the hard way that it can be easily broken. So indeed we have to be respectful and considerate.

Community can ask the very same. Suffice it to recall that the door was slammed when the foundation was working on the required marketing plan.

I cannot believe that there is a clear and conscientious will in TDF to compete with it's own ecosystem. And I agree with you that, also when there is an online under TDF infrastructure (which no one can nor want to forbid, since we have a meritocratic community. And for which we know what is reasonable and asked for to have a sensible fair project) we must have ways to simply not compete with the ecosystem.

I still don't understand why people resort to self-flagellation by arguing that TDF is trying to compete with the ecosystem. I think Sophi has put it very well by saying that there are spaces for everyone and that worldwide not all users are able to pay a subscription to access a product. In Latin America, for example, there are countless social organizations or organizations linked to indigenous peoples whose main role is to narrow the gap in access to technology. Sound familiar?

And for growing the ecosystem: both mentoring and projects to find new markets/parties that understand the opportunities and want to do some investment are needed. Let's (again) try to focus on work like that, would be my suggestion.

TDF has to  take care of those left over users anyway.

Not sure what you mean with that.

Some may reply that it doesn't fulfill the technical part, but to my eyes, if we get room for everyone, community will show up to help filling the gap.

It is encouraging to see, apart from some problems as pointed out by others, enthusiasm. But hmmm..., with all history, discussions and careful working on proposals, I think it is not unfair if I notify that it is somehow late. Then of course: better late then not at all :wink:

I believe that neither TDF nor the community can be blamed for not satisfying the whims of a company.

#4

Hi Daniel, *,

Win-win is a situation to which we all aspire. However, one of the key pieces in this mutant puzzle is to broaden the ecosystem rather than narrow it. And, in this sense, clear rules and boundaries are necessary.

Sure. Therefore I wrote ideas on broadening the ecosystem. And I'm sure we only can agree that TDF deliberately competing with one of the few ecosystem contributors, would not be a particularly smart thing to do there :wink: And the good thing is that that can be avoided, also when we are encouraging more businesses to help our ecosystem grow.

TDF cannot force the entire mass of LibreOffice users to consume a particular product. It can, however, improve it's work to raise awareness about the importance of contributing (which is not reduced to code) to the community that embraces the project.

Fully agree here. I guess we all hope that we can return to work on that soon - obviously the time that we can spend here is limited for the most of us. And choosing to put that energy in areas where we really can make growth, seems wise.
We are in a wonderful open source project with work that we hope many people will enjoy to use, in all freedom, and that they find encouraging to contribute to.

Yes. Finding balance between ecosystem members and TDF is not easy. In the Autumn of 2020 we learned the hard way that it can be easily broken. So indeed we have to be respectful and considerate.

Community can ask the very same. Suffice it to recall that the door was slammed when the foundation was working on the required marketing plan.

If that is part of how the situation is experienced, it only shows how delicate these processes are.
And then still, apart from all things that happened then: looking back I'm sure that not all that I do/did is/was perfect. And please allow me to take the liberty to assume that is similar for others :wink:

I still don't understand why people resort to self-flagellation by arguing that TDF is trying to compete with the ecosystem. I think Sophi

I think I missed seeing that happening. In any case, for me self-flagellation is not the category under which one would expect to find a normal 'clear and reliable relation'.

has put it very well by saying that there are spaces for everyone and that worldwide not all users are able to pay a subscription to access a product. In Latin America, for example, there are countless social organizations or organizations linked to indigenous peoples whose main role is to narrow the gap in access to technology. Sound familiar?

We see these things everywhere. And it will not surprise you that I regret to see that. Hence my love to be in open source development and open source projects.
And of course no country or region is excluded - people from anywhere should feel encouraged to contribute. I firmly believe that we can provide software for free and do such in a smart way not hurting our very own ecosystem, that we so desperately need. Everyday we are ready to welcome people from everywhere around the world contributing and are we educating them to get them started.

I believe that neither TDF nor the community can be blamed for not satisfying the whims of a company.

Very true. And honestly I hope that I should not understand that you mean that we have company's whims, demanding the community to satisfy whatever their needs are...

Looking forward, on the side of solutions that are not crushing our open source development: I think I made a careful hint already in my response to Sophie.. I hope it is not too hidden :wink: and that it encourages people to think about real solutions.
I look forward to listen to and talk about all ideas, e.g./especially in Milan. In the mean time encouraging and helping people to do what they believe in: work on open source!

Cheers,
Cor

#5

Hi Daniel, *,

Win-win is a situation to which we all aspire. However, one of the key pieces in this mutant puzzle is to broaden the ecosystem rather than narrow it. And, in this sense, clear rules and boundaries are necessary.

Sure. Therefore I wrote ideas on broadening the ecosystem. And I'm sure we only can agree that TDF deliberately competing with one of the few ecosystem contributors, would not be a particularly smart thing to do there :wink: And the good thing is that that can be avoided, also when we are encouraging more businesses to help our ecosystem grow.

Why, why, why offer an online version is seen as a competition??? As many people needs it, TDF has to. What we need is to build a scenario where all the actors involved feel less uncomfortable.

TDF cannot force the entire mass of LibreOffice users to consume a particular product. It can, however, improve it's work to raise awareness about the importance of contributing (which is not reduced to code) to the community that embraces the project.

Fully agree here. I guess we all hope that we can return to work on that soon - obviously the time that we can spend here is limited for the most of us. And choosing to put that energy in areas where we really can make growth, seems wise.
We are in a wonderful open source project with work that we hope many people will enjoy to use, in all freedom, and that they find encouraging to contribute to.

Yes. Finding balance between ecosystem members and TDF is not easy. In the Autumn of 2020 we learned the hard way that it can be easily broken. So indeed we have to be respectful and considerate.

Community can ask the very same. Suffice it to recall that the door was slammed when the foundation was working on the required marketing plan.

If that is part of how the situation is experienced, it only shows how delicate these processes are.
And then still, apart from all things that happened then: looking back I'm sure that not all that I do/did is/was perfect. And please allow me to take the liberty to assume that is similar for others :wink:

I still don't understand why people resort to self-flagellation by arguing that TDF is trying to compete with the ecosystem. I think Sophi

I think I missed seeing that happening. In any case, for me self-flagellation is not the category under which one would expect to find a normal 'clear and reliable relation'.

has put it very well by saying that there are spaces for everyone and that worldwide not all users are able to pay a subscription to access a product. In Latin America, for example, there are countless social organizations or organizations linked to indigenous peoples whose main role is to narrow the gap in access to technology. Sound familiar?

We see these things everywhere. And it will not surprise you that I regret to see that. Hence my love to be in open source development and open source projects.
And of course no country or region is excluded - people from anywhere should feel encouraged to contribute. I firmly believe that we can provide software for free and do such in a smart way not hurting our very own ecosystem, that we so desperately need. Everyday we are ready to welcome people from everywhere around the world contributing and are we educating them to get them started.

I believe that neither TDF nor the community can be blamed for not satisfying the whims of a company.

Very true. And honestly I hope that I should not understand that you mean that we have company's whims, demanding the community to satisfy whatever their needs are...

Seriously?

Looking forward, on the side of solutions that are not crushing our open source development: I think I made a careful hint already in my response to Sophie.. I hope it is not too hidden :wink: and that it encourages people to think about real solutions.
I look forward to listen to and talk about all ideas, e.g./especially in Milan. In the mean time encouraging and helping people to do what they believe in: work on open source!

Cheers,
Cor

What about the people who have indicated, and not for the first time, that the LOOL development/building had an artificially high barrier to entry?, that is not something that can encourage anyone to participate.

Impressum (Legal Info) | Datenschutzerklärung (Privacy Policy)   Content on this site is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution Share Alike 3.0 license.