Am 29.02.12 17:48, schrieb Rob Weir:
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 11:04 AM, Pedro Giffuni<[email protected]> wrote:
FWIW;
On 02/29/12 07:54, Rob Weir wrote:
I don't see how this would have helped with Team OOo. Surely, the
logo issue was only a small part of the problem, a very small part.
Even if we had a "powered by logo", there would have been the other
issues that were entirely irreconcilable with any reasonable Apache or
project trademark policy, such as the name of their organization and
the tenor of their fundraising efforts. So not a very good example,
IMHO.
Maybe a better example would be the FreeBSD port? That does not have
the extraneous issues that we had with TOO.
For FreeBSD we will not be rebranding so the idea will be more
in the lines of "Apache OpenOffice powered by FreeBSD" and
not the other way around.
But the question is where do we draw the line?
Why not? would you do the same politic as the Mozilla Foundation, with
the Ice(animal) on Debian? Apache httpd is also called Apache httpd on
any distro. Why AOO should go a different way?
If distros ship a more or less clean version, they should be able to use
the main brand.. If the packagers are AOO Commiter, I see realy no
problem here. If the packagers are no commiter we may should be
informated about the Version.
Pedro.
