On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 12:19 AM, Rob Weir <robw...@apache.org> wrote: > On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 4:12 PM, Marcus (OOo) <marcus.m...@wtnet.de> wrote: >> Am 02/06/2013 09:13 PM, schrieb Andrea Pescetti: >> >>> On 31/01/2013 Andrea Pescetti wrote: >>>> >>>> It got more coverage than needed, probably. It is just a proposal at >>>> this stage, like dozens of other proposals. >>> >>> >>> It is starting to become something a little bit more official now. >>> Minutes ago, the "FESCo meeting" (Fedora Engineering Steering Committee) >>> approved the feature for Fedora 19 unanimously, 9-0. >> >> >> Great news. >> >> >>> They will likely publish some minutes, but I copy-paste from the chat. >>> --- >>> Feature is accepted under the condition that the conflicts must be >>> worked out. OpenOffice and LibreOffice packagers get to work them out. >>> There is no FESCo mandate that LibreOffice must change to accommodate >>> OpenOffice at this time. Alternatives is not the way to resolve the >>> conflicts but environment-modules may be looked at as a similar means to >>> achieve that. >>> --- >>> >>> Explanations: >>> >>> - Conflicts are over the "soffice" and "unopkg" aliases, and possibly >>> others, which would be needed by both OpenOffice and LibreOffice. Here I >>> hope that the LibreOffice packagers can agree on some solutions (note: >>> it's really about the packages, since the upstream LibreOffice does not >>> conflict). Stephan Bergmann explained that there is still some usage of >>> the hard-coded "soffice" by external applications and in the SDK. So >>> this really needs to be clarified to see whether OpenOffice will break >>> if it doesn't own the "soffice" alias. >>> >>> - For historical reasons, the "ooffice", "oowriter"... aliases are >>> assigned to LibreOffice. Although we discussed it on the mailing lists, >>> this won't change. So, unless we have the funny idea of squatting >>> "lowriter", "localc"..., we are left with "aoowriter", "aoocalc" and so >>> on. >> >> >> I've the idea that both parties are changing to an own naming syntax: >> >> soffice -> aooffice *and* soffice -> loffice and so on with other names. >> >> Then both have work to do and nobody is in advantage to profit from old >> stuff. >> > > But I would have trademark concerns if a statement like this installed > anything but OpenOffice: > > sudo yum install openoffice.org > > Regards, > > -Rob >
On at least Ubuntu 12.04 (a long term support version), doing this: sudo apt-get install openoffice.org will install LibreOffice. Package description: This is a transitional package, replacing the OpenOffice.org packaging with the LibreOffice packaging. It can be safely removed after an upgrade. I've been wondering whether this is legal? Regards Damjan
