incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Pedro Giffuni <...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [Proposal] Renaming of OpenOffice.org - was: [proposal] development for the first AOO release
Date Mon, 24 Oct 2011 16:45:48 GMT
Hi Andrew;

Yes, I agree its healthy to discuss this in its
own thread. 
I was in AOO (without .org) camp but the trademark
we own is OOo. Until decided otherwise I will keep
using AOOo in written documentation and code but
otherwise referring to it as OpenOffice (or Apache
OpenOffice), either in email or spoken, should be OK.

Pedro.

--- On Mon, 10/24/11, Andrew Rist <andrew.rist@oracle.com> wrote:

> This is an issue that has stirred
> much emotion, and is one that has not 
> reached consensus.
> Due to the requirement of having our official name be
> 'Apache 
> [something]', I believe the current consensus points
> towards one of the 
> following two options:
> 
>   * Apache OpenOffice.org
>   * Apache OpenOffice
> 
> Both of these seem to satisfy both the 'Apache in name'
> requirement and 
> the 'Trademark available' requirement. (Apache and
> OpenOffice together 
> seem to get around issues with using OpenOffice without the
> .org on its 
> own)  Also, before the discussion of the branding and
> historical nature 
> of the importance of the '.org', I would suggest people
> look at mailing 
> list and forum posts from our users - on the whole, they
> rarely identify 
> the current product as OpenOffice.org.
> 
> Let's not try to make this decision in other threads. 
> Let's make this 
> decision in a thread about naming the project (and
> product).
> 
> Andrew
> 
> 
> 
> On 10/24/2011 8:39 AM, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
> > BTW,
> >
> > Its clear to me the final product name is
> >
> > Apache OpenOffice.org
> >
> > and I already used it in Rev. 1184898.
> >
> > Pedro.
> >
> > --- On Mon, 10/24/11, Dennis E. Hamilton<dennis.hamilton@acm.org> 
> wrote:
> >
> >>     BTW:
> >>     When we do the rebranding
> stuff again
> >> (sick!) we should have a final
> >>     product name at hand at
> that time.
> >>
> >> I suspect that the restraints on identification
> of
> >> incubator releases will apply to however it is
> branded.
> >>
> >> It looks like the first one, at least, is
> definitely a
> >> "Technology Preview" release.  It and the
> second will
> >> certainly be ways to bring the QA, localization,
> and related
> >> activities back into action as well. 
> >>
> >> Exciting times ahead!
> >>
> >>
> >>   - Dennis E. Hamilton
> >>     tools for document
> >> interoperability,<http://nfoWorks.org/>
> >>     dennis.hamilton@acm.org
> 
> >> gsm: +1-206-779-9430  @orcmid
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Marcus (OOo) [mailto:marcus.mail@wtnet.de]
> >>
> >> Sent: Monday, October 24, 2011 07:34
> >> To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
> >> Subject: Re: [proposal] development for the first
> AOO
> >> release
> >>
> >> Am 10/24/2011 03:18 PM, schrieb Oliver-Rainer
> Wittmann:
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> I would like to propose the following
> development
> >> milestones on our way
> >>> to the first AOO release:
> >>>
> >>> - "IP cleared" milestone
> >> [ ... ]
> >>> - "features back" milestone
> >>> For this milestone we should work on bringing
> back the
> >> features which
> >>> are lost in the previous milestone. I do not
> think
> >> that we have to bring
> >>> back every feature for a first release. Thus,
> we would
> >> have got the
> >>> possibility to work on the features which are
> of most
> >> interest. At some
> >>> point we could create a "release candidate"
> and start
> >> working on
> >>> stabilizing it for a first release, if we
> think that
> >> the "must have"
> >>> features are back.
> >> [ ... ]
> >>> Any
> remarks/comments/improvements/adjustments?
> >>> Any objections to follow such plan for our
> first
> >> release?
> >>
> >> It's fine to see a kind of roadmap starting.
> >>
> >> Also to have a first public intermediate step with
> a clean
> >> IP is great,
> >> towards our first "real" Apache release. Then
> everybody can
> >> see that
> >> it's really going forward with OOo (as often the
> feeling is
> >> the opposite
> >> in the public when you read news and blogs).
> >>
> >> And of course we have to make clear that this
> milestone is
> >> really just
> >> an intermediate step and not what the most would
> expect.
> >>
> >> BTW:
> >> When we do the rebranding stuff again (sick!) we
> should
> >> have a final
> >> product name at hand at that time.
> >>
> >> Marcus
> >>
> >> [ ... ]
> >>
> >>
> 
> -- 
> 
> Andrew Rist | Interoperability Architect
> OracleCorporate Architecture Group
> Redwood Shores, CA | 650.506.9847
> 
> 

Mime
View raw message