Open Life

So I participated in the FLISOL 2007 event in LinuxCabal. My talk was about development of extensions in Linux. The talk was pretty good, but I guess the audience was too much of a newbie to connect with the talk.

My talk was pretty technical yet it was just a descriptive talk, i didnt got into specifics of the development of extensions in OpenOffice.org (spanish).

The talk guide the audience throught UI of OpenOffice.org to use the macros and the different bindings to languages that UNO support.

I showed the file structure of OpenOffice.org to let users know how to load the code either locally or remotely.

Here is an example in Python:

import uno

localContext = uno.getComponentContext()
resolver = localContext.ServiceManager.createInstanceWithContext(
                                          "com.sun.star.bridge.UnoUrlResolver", localContext )
ctx = resolver.resolve( "uno:socket, host=localhost,             
                                      port=2002;urp;StarOffice.ComponentContext" )

and how to add Python from the command line:

>
> /opt/openoffice.org2.2/program/unopkg add Wavelet.uno.zip
> 
> /opt/openoffice.org2.2/program/unopkg remove Wavelet.uno.zip
>

Finally I gave the description of the IDL reference in OpenOffice.org and how the interfaces interact with uno.

Unfortunately there were 2 things that went wrong, one is that OOo wouldnt show the IDE for Basic, and the samples I played around about the language which was ok in a sense since I wouldnt be able to finalize my presentation.

I put some code in basic, difference between a plain script in Basic and a more powerful script with connectivity to API.

Listening to the killer innovation podcast (http://www.techtrend.com/blog/) I found a fundamental flaw or a tremendous opportunity to innovate. Basically FLOSS is all about choice, we say that to heart, you have access to the source code which provide you with the ownership no other proprietary entity gives you and you have the value of freedom.

However I think this message is not correctly delivered to the public. Why? Because the public, being end users or corporations, don't really understand what you are saying. Yes, what came out of your mouth is easy to understand, but the 'how exactly does that works' is not.

I think FLOSS needs to innovate in this concept allowing end users, companies to easily capitalize that value of accessing/modifiying. A middle layers that talk between the core developer of the project, and the needs of the companies.

You can say consultants do that part, but really, consultants are like ants, you can't pin point a single one and they all too small to support a bigger structure or an easier structure.

You can argue IBM is a big ant, but their segment is way on the top of many end users and SMB. If IBM went cheap as in taking $1000-$500 services to do exactly that, modifiying the way your software works, I guess it will be a different picture to the end user.

Of course IBM here being the variable, what about other new companies that want to target exactly that segment. That can say, I will make your OpenOffice.org fly and give 3 spins and come back for $300 or $3000 dls. Or simply just, sit down and look what changes are actually worth to your company and implement them.

To do that I think there are some fundamental aspects of FLOSS that need to evolve, one answer is CVS, 80% of the FLOSS projects run on an old technology called CVS while is mainstream and widely used, is also a model that might be limiting the way FLOSS interact with the general public/consultants.

Wikipedia is an example of a layer that end users and smb can afford to implemente, modify and optimize without much cost for them. Even if Wikipedia started chargin $1 buck per edit, is affordable for any company and end user.

If Wikipedia was teh way to go for end users so that their thoughts can be transformed into working code on their structure, it will really prompt the promise of Freedom and will make sense of owning code.

Unfortunately the answer is not easy but acknowleding this fact is a great step to put down the values of hacking, freedom, ownership, innovation.

As a member and leader of the OpenOffice.org community I can assure you that OOo inspire people, people are always commenting:
- I want a OOo Project Management
- I want a Outlook-like for OOo
- I need this bug corrected
- We want a weboffice
- I want a Palm version of OOo

This comments definetly have 2 things:
- 1 they use our product and valued it
- They are inspired to keep using it and expand to other areas

It would be interesting to see if we can float those thoughts and raise funds for the development of it such as make a stock flotation on 'creating a OOo Outlook'. People buy an IPO of $5 bucks per stock and then a 2nd offering at 50, another at 500 and so on. You end up with $100,000 which will pay 5 developers to work on the Outlook module connecting to the OpenOffice.org suite.

That sounds great, however at this moment there are not enough people hacking in the UNO project which means that the public knowledge of the OOo API so the cost might be larger than simply hacking on top of the API but also learning the API which can get up to 100,000 alone to learn it and become good at it.

Same thing goes for GTK, Mono, Qt, XUL and other frameworks out there. However that's beyond the original point but this flotation might give that method to vote with their wallets, and the community raise fund to hire developer houses.