incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dave Fisher <>
Subject Re: What if any responsibility will Apache OpenOffice have with regards to legacy software
Date Mon, 02 Jan 2012 17:51:47 GMT

On Jan 2, 2012, at 8:48 AM, Rob Weir wrote:

> On Mon, Jan 2, 2012 at 11:39 AM, Dave Fisher <> wrote:
>> On Jan 2, 2012, at 8:31 AM, Rob Weir wrote:
>>> On Mon, Jan 2, 2012 at 11:18 AM, drew <> wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>> I own a couple of HP computers, one of which a Mini 110 includes a HP
>>>> specific Linux distro (Mi) which came pre-installed.
>>>> The other day the system performed an update from the Mi reposotories,
>>>> including a new version of - an update to version 2.4...
>>>> So, back to my subject line.
>>>> Just a general question.
>>> Responsibility in what sense?  Anyone is welcome to ask questions on
>>> the user list and support forums for questions related to OOo and
>>> related products.  This is a free service, provided by the community,
>>> not a "responsibility".
>>> There is no warranty provided with OOo or AOO releases, unless that
>>> warranty comes from some company.  If so, that company may have
>>> responsibilities with regards to legacy OOo releases.  But that is not
>>> our concern.
>>> From a community perspective, not a contractual one, I think we "owe
>>> it to the community" to provide an upgrade path for as many legacy
>>> users as possible.  This probably includes a clean upgrade path for
>>> 2.4 users as well.
>> I don't see any reason that we would drop access to legacy releases on
and we have been allowed to put legacy distros into
>> I don't think we update to full Apache OpenOffice branding until
we either have a long term plan or we have an AOO 3.4 release.
> Is that then why we have nonsensical statements on the website, like:
> 'Apache "" is an effort undergoing incubation at The
> Apache Software Foundation (ASF)'

This language is required Apache branding.

> Whether we have had a release or not, or regardless of whether you
> personally think we have a plan or not, I don't what we have now on
> the website makes any sense.  If you look at every other podling at
> Apache, they are encouraged to have and maintain a consistent branding
> from day 1.  It is not predicated on a release or a "long term plan".
> Why should we be different?

Where I am going with the CMS is towards convergence on the layout.

By "long term plan" I mean when the project thinks we should make branding changes to the logo. We need to have a clear consensus on changing the logo. We may need oversight
from the IPMC and trademarks. Once we do then changes are trivial.

So, changing the logo on is something that I am not willing to JFDI nor am
I willing to CTR. In this case we need to RTC - review then commit.

It's my opinion that the general community will interpret this logo change and the project
message should be clear about the change if and when it occurs.


> -Rob
>> REgards,
>> DAve
>>> -Rob
>>>> Thanks
>>>> //drew

View raw message