Andy Hall wrote:
We also need to discuss, project management (not who but techniques/software etc incl the dotproject software that Davey mentioned)
I agree with this however there's a bit of a catch 22 here because we really need to start an (organised official) dialogue with OO.o (through the PM), before we can be 100% concrete on what we're doing. For example we're not 100% sure on what tools we can have provided to us by OO.o, or how they manage the project overall. We will have to be compatible to a certain degree with how they do things. The more people look into stuff the more little nuances crop up.
There will probably have to be more talk than action for a while as things fall into place. I predict that there will be quite a few changes before we get into a position that we're comfortable with. I a bit worried that people might end up having to do more work than is necessary because they start on something before it's a cert and have to go back and start again.
I agree, however I suspect that how we manage our team and PR is going ot be up to us, whilst OO.o may provide a holding page and CVS access (again we wont know until we contact them, after the voting is complete), they will probably be expecting us to actaully provide the tools to schedule whatever tasks are undertaken, as well as any bug tracking and the like. But as you say once we have the Project Management team ready, we can contact OO.o officially and find out.
There is going to be a lot of talking and descision making before any actual porting takes place, theres no point deciding on (say) using Reaction for the gui stuff if we decide to build an X11 library first
and even prior to that there is a lot of investigatory work that needs doing, to look at the code figure out all the unmentioned dependancies, and report back about the various ways of doing the port (pros and cons for each)
Mark