It certainly (correctly) indicates there are unofficial editions in circulation. I see that as a helpful differentiator. I would not jump to the conclusion they are untrustworthy; however, the use of a validated "Libreoffice technology" signifier as Italo has proposed would fix that if it were a problem for other editions to confirm they too are approved by TDF.
The term "Community Edition" is very commonly used to differentiate feature-limited versions so if I had to choose, I would rather our version was considered strong because we use an "Official Edition" tag rather than the software produced by others being considered stronger because we use a "Community Edition" tag. Cheers, Simon On Fri, Oct 23, 2020 at 3:16 PM Nigel Verity <nigelver...@hotmail.com> wrote: > Doesn't this imply there are some unofficial and, thereby, untrustworthy > editions in circulation? > > Nige > > > On 23 Oct 2020, at 06:44, Simon Phipps <si...@webmink.com> wrote: > > > > Taking on board all the concerns about not giving the impression of a > > weaker version, and if "no label" is really not an option, how about > > calling TDF's package "official edition"? > > > > -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: marketing+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: https://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/marketing/ Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy
