incubator-ooo-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rob Weir <>
Subject Re: [Proposal] Change in Apache Branding...
Date Thu, 27 Oct 2011 23:49:16 GMT
On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 7:41 PM, Terry <> wrote:
> 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.

Terry,  you are subscribed to the ooo-marketing list.   I see a post
by you from yesterday.  So something is working.  Make sure you are
posting to


>>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
>>>>> "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 following
>>>>> 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
>  stated.
>>>> --
>>>> 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.

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message