On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 11:21 AM, Rob Weir <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 12:38 PM, Kay Schenk <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Mon, May 14, 2012 at 3:07 PM, Rob Weir <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> On Mon, May 14, 2012 at 5:18 PM, Kay Schenk <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> > OK, I changed the subject on this since I think what we need to > discuss > >> > applies to more than just CD-ROMs...I hope that's OK, see my reply > >> below... > >> > > >> > >> <snip> > >> > >> So the current state of affairs is: > >> > >> 1) Anyone is free to distribute OOo or AOO on CD, on their website, on > >> USB keys, etc. We're open source, and the license fully permits this. > >> > >> 2) Although use of the ASF-owned trademarks is restricted, any one is > >> free to send an email to the project and request the use of the logos > >> for use on their CD distribution. We have received and approved > >> requests like this in the past. For example, CD's for distribution at > >> conferences. > >> > >> If we want we can just continue with those two principles and do > >> nothing more. But IMHO there are some subset of redistribution of > >> AOO that we might permit the use of the logo without any explicit > >> permission. If we decide to do this, we could specify the conditions > >> under which such redistribution might take place. Note that this is > >> not a restriction on what distributors may do. They always have the > >> options given per #1 and #2 above. The point is merely to provide a > >> lighter weight process for doing #2, in a subset of cases that we > >> believe are for the public good. > >> > >> It is an additional question whether we want to maintain a registry or > >> directory of such distributors. > >> > >> I'd be especially interested in what users think of this. What would > >> be their expectations if we maintained such a list? > >> > > > > I can't answer this one and I appreciate your perspective #1. > > > > The immediate thing(s) I'm concerned about is packages that we have > > highlighted on the website -- all the "porting" section > > > > http://www.openoffice.org/porting/ > > > > Should this continue. There is no disclaimer here. > > > > Additionally, since we have no link to this from the main download page, > > how do folks even find out about it. > > > > Advice needed. > > > > I think we need to make it clear what the 'porting project" is, if we > keep that name. > > A) A way to enable 3rd parties to create ports and distribute them on > their own > > or > > B) A way to enable new project volunteers to create and release new > platform support within the project > > There is some overlap here, since someone who does A) will likely be > contributing patches as well. > > This is parallel to enhancements of AOO as well, whether we speak of > enhancement translations, extensions, features, etc. > > A) Doing the work in our SVN and releasing as part of an official release > > B) Doing the work externally, and releasing externally. > > I think both are fine, and we should help and encourage both, as part > of the broader ecosystem. But we'll want to distinguish, in branding, > and in how we link to these products, what is really an official > release of the project and what is a 3rd party derivation. > > So I think the concept is broader than just "ports". One idea is to > create a new page and link to it from > http://www.openoffice.org/download/, as a new "block" on that page. > Well I think it would be a great idea to link the "ports" to the download page. For now, I'll post a separate thread to find out more. I don't know anything about the "porting" project. > It could be called "3rd party Ports, Enhancements and Extensions". > And on that page we could put the disclaimer and then link to other > products that are based upon AOO. And maybe from the OOo 3.3.0 > download page we could link to the legacy ports page? > > -Rob > > > (I will pull the UpUbuntu link from the install instructions later > > today...should I add it to "porting"?). > > > > > >> Alternatively, we could rely on distributors to advertise themselves. > >> A search engine query, for example, for "OpenOffice CD Schweitz" > >> should match a customer with a vendor, if such a vendor in Switzerland > >> exists. The customer would still need to establish trust, risk their > >> payment and the vendor would similarly need to watch out for their > >> reputation. And the vendor would have motivation to keep his listings > >> current. None of this would involve Apache. > >> > >> This is the way consumers match themselves up with goods everywhere > >> else. We seem to get every other variety of CD in the world without > >> involving Apache. Why should this be different? > >> > >> In other words, isn't this a problem that solves itself? We give > >> permission to use a special logo on CD's that follow our rules. We > >> then educate users to look for that special logo. We then leave it to > >> the distributors to advertise themselves. > >> > >> Note: I'm not opposed to maintaining a registry at Apache I just > >> think that we have little motivation to keep it up to date, and so it > >> will not be maintained. > >> > >> > == non-formal distributions == > >> > Right now, as we've discovered, there are already folks distributing > 3.4 > >> > that we don't know anything about. We don't know who they are, we > don't > >> even > >> > know WHAT they've got in their distributions. They haven't asked for > >> > permission from us, we don't even know where they're obtaining what > >> they've > >> > got. > >> > >> This is permitted by the license. AOO can be redistributed and > >> modified and the modifications can be redistributed. Even if the > >> modifications suck, there is nothing we can do. > >> > >> Trademark is another issue. The right to redistribute does not > >> include permission to use the logo in promoted the modified version. > >> > >> Malware is another issue. Users might have local options, depending > >> on local laws. For example California has an anti-spyware law. But > >> that is something that a user would need to pursue, not Apache, > >> > >> > We should, by some means, address this immediately in some way -- > >> message on > >> > the home page etc. We don't know who they are, we don't even know WHAT > >> > they've got in their distributions. > >> > > >> > >> User education is also part of the solution, I think. > >> > >> > This doesn't require any process by us. > >> > > >> > > >> > == partners, more formal requests == > >> > I would put the former CD-ROM folks in this category. We provided a > list > >> for > >> > our customers to obtain OOo in this way. > >> > > >> > Your ideas about obtaining software from one of the mirrors is good > here. > >> > > >> > Rob's replacement page for distribution talks about our establishing a > >> > process-- > >> > > >> > http://ooo-site.staging.apache.org/distribution/index.html > >> > > >> > so let's talk about that. What should this process be? What are we > >> requiring > >> > from them. What information do we need from third party folks, like > >> CD-ROM > >> > providers or other builds/methods of distribution, that come to us? > >> > > >> > > >> > == and finally, helping ourselves == > >> > > >> > Do we know of any sites with AOO 3.4 that we want to include for users > >> with > >> > potentially helpful distributions? This is a case where no one has > >> > contacted us but we found something that might be useful, and tested > it > >> out > >> > to our satisfaction. > >> > > >> > A case in point would be (me) putting that UpUbuntu link in the > install > >> > guide. These folks didn't even come to us, and there have been > concerns > >> by > >> > other ooo-dev folks about it. At the time, many were excited about it, > >> but, > >> > well...maybe not so fast... Does adding something like this to a page > on > >> our > >> > site somehow make us responsible for it? > >> > > >> > Further thoughts? > >> > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > > -- > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > MzK > > > > "Well, life has a funny way of sneaking up on you > > And life has a funny way of helping you out > > Helping you out." > > -- "Ironic", Alanis Morissette > -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- MzK "Well, life has a funny way of sneaking up on you And life has a funny way of helping you out Helping you out." -- "Ironic", Alanis Morissette
