incubator-ooo-marketing mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Marcus (OOo)" <marcus.m...@wtnet.de>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Product Branding
Date Fri, 04 Nov 2011 15:29:24 GMT
Am 11/04/2011 04:08 PM, schrieb Dave Fisher:
>
> On Nov 4, 2011, at 6:10 AM, Marcus (OOo) wrote:
>
>> Am 11/04/2011 01:58 PM, schrieb Jürgen Schmidt:
>>> On 11/4/11 11:34 AM, Simon Phipps wrote:
>>>> On Nov 4, 2011 8:17 AM, "Jürgen Schmidt"<jogischmidt@googlemail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> Give me one reason why we should support a project that only take
>>>>> our code or pieces of our code and give nothing back?
>
> As far as "taking" code and never giving back is concerned that is a feature of the Apache
License. It is a fact. We want people to use the code. We hope they give back. We hope that
users realize the benefits.
>
>>>>
>>>> That's not helpful talk here, Juergen. Exactly the same could be said of
>>>> IBM, yet Oracle gave the trademarks to Apache so they could try their
>>>> hand
>>>> in spite of it. Moreover, I am not aware of any "taking" of AOOo code,
>>>> but
>>>> I am aware that around a third of the commits to AOOo so far have come
>>>> from
>>>> people who now work on LibreOffice.
>>>>
>>>> We're a far more complex community than such tribal sentiments reflect
>>>> and
>>>> I suggest moderating your condemnation, respecting the fact that AOOo
>>>> is a
>>>> peer in a larger community and leaving doors open to whatever
>>>> collaboration
>>>> may be appropriate later.
>>>>
>>> First i don't have talked about LibreOffice here, i talked about all
>>> products based on the former OpenOffice.org code base. And i don't say
>>> that we can't change it later when there is a close relation visible. I
>>> simply would like to focus on the more important things at the moment.
>>
>> Just to clarify:
>> Please don't understand my suggestion to buildup a common home as a short term target.
It's for later when the dust has settled after 1-2 releases. At the moment we have indeed
more important things to do.
>
> No doubt, but I do think we should do what all good architects do when they expect a
connection to be made, we make sure we are ready for it. Whatever it turns out to be.
>
> Last week we had a discussion about the securityteam@oo.o ML. There was a lot of pressure
from LO and others for some type of shared security ML. I wonder if the real need is for some
type of Federation of OpenOffice Peers. One purpose of which would be to negotiate common
ways to do things so that each peer application actually acts like a peer and eliminates the
ways in which conflicts occur that prevent simultaneous use of peer applications by users.
Another would be to help identify scammers who charge for software and then expect FOSS communities
to provide the support. The neutrality position expressed in that long thread by members of
the Libre Office community certainly indicates that openoffice.org would not be considered
a neutral umbrella. While we feel that we could host a "United Nations", AOOo still has a
lot to prove.
>
> Onto finding our brand name and building a release. We can discuss our relations with
peers on a different thread on ooo-dev.

When there is the need to find a new home for a neutral federation of a 
generic OpenOffice.org project (which you have nicely named as "United 
Nations"), man, then we have really a hugh task. And also the "we" has 
to be defined as it's not yet clear. ;-)

Marcus

Mime
View raw message