incubator-ooo-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Terry <>
Subject Re: [Proposal] Change in Apache Branding...
Date Thu, 27 Oct 2011 23:41:08 GMT
Hi, floris

I mistook David's email as one on the marketing mail list.  The topic of re-branding is being
discussed there.  I was about to suggest people subscribe to that list but I noticed while
composing this reply that an email I sent to the list has just been bounced.  If you want
to subscribe notwithstanding, the address to subscribe is

Regards, Terry

P.S.  I forwarded the mailer-daemon email to the marketing list's owner and that also has
now bounced.

>From: floris v <>
>Sent: Friday, 28 October 2011 9:38 AM
>Subject: Re: [Proposal] Change in Apache Branding...
>Op 27-10-2011 23:52, Terry schreef:
>> I do not understand the point Michael made in that email.  Is he suggesting that
no version number be used? 
>> Terry
>>> ________________________________
>>> From: David H. Lipman<DLipman@Verizon.Net>
>>> To:
>>> Sent: Friday, 28 October
 2011 1:44 AM
>>> Subject: Re: [Proposal] Change in Apache Branding...
>>> From: "Michael Acevedo"<>
>>>> Hi,
>>>> I have been reading the OOo forum and first let me congratulate the Apache
OOo team in
>>>> completing the transition of the source code earlier this month. As for my
proposal, it
>>>> stems from one statement made in the Forums indicating that
>>>> "Fundamentally,
>>>> as a project "" is done." If the following is true I think
it creates a
>>>> great opportunity to refresh the brand. My proposal has the
>>>> provision: -
>>>> Drop the "3" or "3.4" suffix from the name and either leave
the office
 suite name as "Apache" or "Apache 4 * The rationale for
>>>> this
>>>> provision is the fact that the OOo code will undergo (or has
>>>> undergone substantial rewriting) to allow the source code to be compliant
with the
>>>> Apache
>>>> 2.0. licence scheme. * Furthermore, IBM's decision to donate Lotus Symphony
to Apache
>>>> will
>>>> most likely result in a "code merger" with the Apache OpenOffice project
which will
>>>> result
>>>> in a very altered (compared to today's) source code. Well
that's the
>>>> basic
>>>> idea behind proposal and I think the brand refresh will be beneficial for
the Apache OOo
>>>> project.
>>>> Again, thank you for your time and keep up the good work!
>>> I agree with all aspects of what Michael suggests and has
>>> -- 
>>> Dave
>With lots of rewriting and going back to old
 software like myspell any 
>version number seems to me a very dubious affair. You might just as well 
>restart with Apache OOo 1.0. A higher version number suggests, after 
>all, that the developers built on an older version and added stuff and 
>removed bugs. Here the story is very different. It's probably my biggest 
>objection to this rebranding: there are quite a few annoying bugs and 
>shortcomings that have plagued users for years, and instead of tackling 
>those, the developers are discarding stuff that works in favour of old 
>software that may not work quite as well. Really.
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message