incubator-ooo-commits mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From conflue...@apache.org
Subject [CONF] Apache OpenOffice Community > User Guides Revisted
Date Sat, 22 Sep 2012 19:31:00 GMT
Space: Apache OpenOffice Community (https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS)
Page: User Guides Revisted (https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/User+Guides+Revisted)
Comment: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/User+Guides+Revisted?focusedCommentId=30736638#comment-30736638

Comment added by Keith N. McKenna:
---------------------------------------------------------------------

@Kay and Dennis;

I believe the issue around them being "official" docs was raised early on the dev list around
the 2011 time frame and had to do with them not being ALv2 licensed and on  server not controlled
by the project.

One issue that was raised in the earlier conversations was the issue of cover art or the docs.
Would we have to get formal permission to use trademarked items such as the gulls?

I agree that using a process such as the AOO Release Management one only adds a level of bureaucracy
and adds nothing useful to them.

To that end I have posted request or lazy consensus in the thread on the dev list to expire
Tuesday September 26 at 05:45 UTC.

In reply to a comment by Dennis E. Hamilton:
Yes, I also have no idea what "official" means in this context.  It is inconceivable that
putting these through something like AOO release management would add anything useful.  I
suppose it means we'd take bugs in the bugzilla and manage errata somehow. 

 I am going to ignore officialness on the basis that what ODFAUthors provides is good enough,
so long as there is active maintenance and contribution there.  That seems like a superior
starting point. 

Change your notification preferences: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/users/viewnotifications.action

Mime
View raw message