incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Götz Wohlberg" <goetz.wohlb...@googlemail.com>
Subject Re: Team OpenOffice White Label Office (powered by Apache Open Office)
Date Wed, 04 Jan 2012 00:22:13 GMT
Hi Don,

Hope you had a relaxing xmas break!

Am 23.12.11 02:44, schrieb Donald Harbison:
> This seems like a much more constructive thread.
>
> FWIW, I know the guys at Team OO, well, at least since I first met them in
> 2005 at OpenOffice.org Conference in Koper, Slovenia. There is passion and
> continuity here that I think Pavel speaks very eloquently about. And it's
> worth respecting and supporting, in my view.
Thanks! I can only echo this.
> This is especially true, if
> they are sincere in stating they will move to exert their efforts as
> volunteers in the future of Apache OpenOffice, once they are finished with
> this maintenance release (3.3.1)...
We would love to start joining the work on future version but we need to 
fix our other problem first, which is funding.
> Sure, there have been blunders, but we here in AOO have not been so great
> with clear communications, so let's face the future, so to speak, together.
>
> To that end, why not offer the TeamOO guys a share of the brand, something
> like 'White Label Office 3.3.1, Powered by OpenOffice.org, now at Apache
> Software Foundation'?
>
> Or, 'White Label Office 3.3.1, Powered by Apache OpenOffice, the new home
> of OpenOffice.org'
Great! That's certainly something we are interested in. I would like to 
see some more details about such a "Powered by"-program.
> So long as their fund raising efforts cease to mis-lead consumers, stating
> clearly that OpenOffice.org is now under the stewardship of the ASF, we're
> good.
Looks like we need to clean-up our messaging even more. Hope you've seen 
the flying box on our website with "Home of the Development Project". 
The problem is to find the balance between a description of our former 
and planned role and a confusing association to the project. One 
example: If we state, we helped to invent OOo, this is an important 
message to our potential customers about our expertise. At the same time 
this message ignores the fact that other inventors are working for IBM, 
Novell or RedHat now. My opinion? They have sponsors and can speak for 
themselves.

Our goal is to convince OpenOffice.org users to upgrade to Apache 
OpenOffice 3.4 and buy support from us. And we will not get paid to just 
promote Apache. So let's sort out who needs to communicate what.
>
> Yes?
Yes!

Thanks,
Goetz
>
> Stefan, Martin and Goetz, please respond first. What do you think?
>
> Best regards,
>
> /don harbison
>
> On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 10:54 AM, Donald Whytock<dwhytock@gmail.com>  wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 11:31 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton
>> <dennis.hamilton@acm.org>  wrote:
>>>   2. I then wondered if "white label" had some other, independent
>> significance.  Indeed it does:<
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White-label_product>.  And here too:<
>> http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/white_label>.  Oddly, the English phrase is
>> apparently used in German as well.  I don't think the association with
>> bootleg music is intended though.  I will have to install the
>> German-language version of the release just to see how the identifier is
>> used within the TOOo release.
>>
>> Actually, by that definition, everything under the ASF is "white
>> label", as it's explicitly legal to rebrand it.  That makes "White
>> Label Office" genuinely ironic.
>>
>> Don
>>

Mime
View raw message