incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Raphael Bircher <rbircher_...@bluewin.ch>
Subject Re: selling open office
Date Wed, 29 Feb 2012 17:02:38 GMT
Am 29.02.12 17:48, schrieb Rob Weir:
> On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 11:04 AM, Pedro Giffuni<pfg@apache.org>  wrote:
>> FWIW;
>>
>>
>> On 02/29/12 07:54, Rob Weir wrote:
>>>
>>> I don't see how this would have helped with Team OOo.  Surely, the
>>> logo issue was only a small part of the problem, a very small part.
>>> Even if we had a "powered by logo", there would have been the other
>>> issues that were entirely irreconcilable with any reasonable Apache or
>>> project trademark policy, such as the name of their organization and
>>> the tenor of their fundraising efforts.  So not a very good example,
>>> IMHO.
>>>
>>> Maybe a better example would be the FreeBSD port?  That does not have
>>> the extraneous issues that we had with TOO.
>>
>> For FreeBSD we will not be rebranding so the idea will be more
>> in the lines of "Apache OpenOffice powered by FreeBSD" and
>> not the other way around.
>>
> But the question is where do we draw the line?
>
Why not? would you do the same politic as the Mozilla Foundation, with 
the Ice(animal) on Debian? Apache httpd is also called Apache httpd on 
any distro. Why AOO should go a different way?

If distros ship a more or less clean version, they should be able to use 
the main brand.. If the packagers are AOO Commiter, I see realy no 
problem here. If the packagers are no commiter we may should be 
informated about the Version.
>> Pedro.


Mime
View raw message