incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dave Fisher <>
Subject Re: [Proposal] Give the BHV publishing house in Kaarst/Germany the permission to use the trademark and logo
Date Sun, 28 Aug 2011 22:12:48 GMT

On Aug 28, 2011, at 1:31 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:

> Dave,
> I'm not sure what you are referring to.  You added a number of locations where?

In places like

are versions of

These have Oracle OOo policies and licenses along with

I've noticed that some of the html is carrying PDL copyright statements. There will need to
be attention to this by the PPMC no hurry, but it is related to the question of prior releases
and what gets moved to apache-extras. The types of issues you are raising.

When we move the issue of old releases and url rewrites is more

I wish I had a little more time to explain today, but other things have my attention today.


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dave Fisher [] 
> Sent: Sunday, August 28, 2011 12:02
> To:
> Cc: 'Peter Junge';
> Subject: Re: [Proposal] Give the BHV publishing house in Kaarst/Germany the permission
to use the trademark and logo
> On Aug 28, 2011, at 11:40 AM, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
> [ ... ]
>> HMMM...
>> Also, and this is probably not the right time for this (especially for
3.3), we might want to come up with a request (or requirement?) that publishers include a
link to locations under our support where current information, updates, and support about can be found.  (That would be separate from links the publisher might provide
for updates on their book and on the 10,000+ templates that are provided on the DVD.)
>> We also, now that I think about it, need to provide information in our distros and
maybe for use in print, about the availability of source code for a specific release and for
information on source code for other releases, including the latest.
>> [I think I will flag these two as notes-to-self for something we need to pay attention
to.  The specific source-code-availability requirement may not be so strict under ALv2 and
Apache practice, in contrast with the LGPL requirement.  It seems like a great thing to perpetuate,
regardless.  It is another reason to keep the domain name operating because
of linking from material in print as well as on-line.]
> I have added a number of the locations that show the Oracle OOo versions of these policies
in our podling's port of the OOo website. Anyone should feel free to start adapting these
properly. I don't have time to get deeply engrossed in these details.
> Regards,
> Dave
> [ ... ]

View raw message