Thanks. I don't know about version numbering but I agree that '.org' is no longer needed nor desirable.
Regards, Terry >________________________________ >From: Michael Acevedo <[email protected]> >To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>; Terry ><[email protected]> >Sent: Friday, 28 October 2011 1:56 PM >Subject: Re: [Proposal] Change in Apache OpenOffice.org Branding... > >My proposal in simple words is either 2 of the following options: > > * Make the first Apache OpenOffice.org release get the 4.0 name as it is >basically a new and mostly rewritten version of the current OOo source code. >or > > * Drop the version number from the Apache OpenOffice.org name. >I think, I will add a third option here, drop the ".org" suffix and go simply >with Apache OpenOffice as the project's name. > >Michael > > >________________________________ >From: Terry <[email protected]> >To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>; David >H. Lipman <[email protected]> >Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2011 5:52 PM >Subject: Re: [Proposal] Change in Apache OpenOffice.org Branding... > >I do not understand the point Michael made in that email. Is he suggesting >that no version number be used? > >Terry > > > > >>________________________________ >>From: David H. Lipman <[email protected]> >>To: [email protected] >>Sent: Friday, 28 October 2011 1:44 AM >>Subject: Re: [Proposal] Change in Apache OpenOffice.org Branding... >> >>From: "Michael Acevedo" <[email protected]> >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> I have been reading the OOo forum and first let me congratulate the Apache >>> OOo team in >>> completing the transition of the source code earlier this month. As for my >>> proposal, it >>> stems from one statement made in the OpenOffice.org Forums indicating that >>> "Fundamentally, >>> as a project "OpenOffice.org" is done." If the following is true I think it >>> creates a >>> great opportunity to refresh the OpenOffice.org brand. My proposal has the >>> following >>> provision: - >>> Drop the "3" or "3.4" suffix from the OpenOffice.org name and either leave >>> the office >>> suite name as "Apache OpenOffice.org" or "Apache OpenOffice.org 4 * The >>> rationale for >>> this >>> provision is the fact that the OOo code will undergo (or has >>> undergone substantial rewriting) to allow the source code to be compliant >>> with the >>> Apache >>> 2.0. licence scheme. * Furthermore, IBM's decision to donate Lotus Symphony >>> to Apache >>> will >>> most likely result in a "code merger" with the Apache OpenOffice project >>> which will >>> result >>> in a very altered (compared to today's) OpenOffice.org source code. Well >>> that's the >>> basic >>> idea behind proposal and I think the brand refresh will be beneficial for >>> the Apache OOo >>> project. >>> Again, thank you for your time and keep up the good work! >>> >> >>I agree with all aspects of what Michael suggests and has stated. >> >> >> >>-- >>Dave >>Multi-AV Scanning Tool - http://multi-av.thespykiller.co.uk >>http://www.pctipp.ch/downloads/dl/35905.asp >> >> >> >> >>--------------------------------------------------------------------- >>To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >>For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >> >> >> >> > >
