Mailing-List: contact ooo-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: local policy)
Message-ID: <4EA59261.2070707@oracle.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2011 09:29:21 -0700
From: Andrew Rist <andrew.rist@oracle.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64;
 rv:6.0.1) Gecko/20110830 Thunderbird/6.0.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [Proposal] Renaming of OpenOffice.org - was: [proposal]
 development
 for the first AOO release
References: <1319470762.77097.YahooMailClassic@web113517.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
In-Reply-To: <1319470762.77097.YahooMailClassic@web113517.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

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