Mailing-List: contact ooo-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: neutral (nike.apache.org: local policy)
Message-ID: <1325643572.72938.YahooMailClassic@web113509.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2012 18:19:32 -0800 (PST)
From: Pedro Giffuni <pfg@apache.org>
Reply-To: pfg@apache.org
Subject: R: [WWW] rebranding...
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAGj3216HEKfsA=SRcjPzxEZmx5ofEYDM3E4vo-=05mu4gmHjZg@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

=0A=0A--- Mar 3/1/12, Kay Schenk <kay.schenk@gmail.com> ha scritto:=0A=0A..=
.=0A> OK, we got to see the new logo and a=0A> bit of a discussion has ensu=
ed re the=0A> now Apache hosted http://www.openoffice.org/ and the=0A> exis=
ting logo on that=0A> site.=0A> =0A> My question concerns the extent of "fu=
ture" rebranding.=0A> =0A> yes, it's pretty easy to just change out the log=
o, but=0A> should anticipate=0A> changing out ALL occurrences of OpenOffice=
.org to "Apache=0A> OpenOffice" as well?=0A> =0A> Thoughts on this?=0A> =0A=
=0AI think it wouldn't hurt to leave some references to the=0Aold brand. So=
mething like "Apache OpenOffice, formerly=0AOpenOffice.org" in the main pag=
es and Apache OpenOffice=0Ain the rest.=0A=0APedro.