Re: [steering-discuss] Re: screen-shots Documentation Team
Hi all, just to keep your eye on one of the phrases Alex wrote, I remove most of this mail: Alexander Thurgood schrieb: [...] I make part of my living out of representing IP rights holders in legal actions against those who do not respect those rights, but also defending those who happen to be on receiving end when the boot is on the other foot. So I would take this position as an expert's view. Perhaps it would be possible for Alex to attend the SC call when this topic is discussed. [...] It is a no-brainer : either ask in MS writing, consult an attorney for each territory of interest (expensive no doubt, and possibly unsatisfactory, with fairly heterogeneous answers), or just plain don't use MS's stuff. Best regards Bernhard PS: If Microsoft considers the icons to close or minimize a window as belonging to their product icons (they are icons of their product Windows XP/Vista/7), it's hard to avoid them. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [steering-discuss] Re: screen-shots Documentation Team
Simon Phipps schrieb: As someone who also has worked in this field for the best part of a decade, and given the advice Alex has already provided appears extreme, I would suggest also seeking counsel from another specialist if TDF wishes to pursue this path, perhaps from SFLC. +1 Bernhard S. On 9 Jul 2011, at 22:26, Bernhard Dippold wrote: Hi all, just to keep your eye on one of the phrases Alex wrote, I remove most of this mail: Alexander Thurgood schrieb: [...] I make part of my living out of representing IP rights holders in legal actions against those who do not respect those rights, but also defending those who happen to be on receiving end when the boot is on the other foot. So I would take this position as an expert's view. Perhaps it would be possible for Alex to attend the SC call when this topic is discussed. [...] It is a no-brainer : either ask in MS writing, consult an attorney for each territory of interest (expensive no doubt, and possibly unsatisfactory, with fairly heterogeneous answers), or just plain don't use MS's stuff. Best regards Bernhard -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [steering-discuss] Request for official statement about dedicated logos for community groups
Hi Drew, all Just short: I fully agree that the question of defining the LibreOffice teams and dedicated parts of the community is important. Only after this definition the question about dedicated logos should be posed. Even if I'll probably not be able contribute much to the thread, I welcome your interest in this discussion. In my first mail to this thread I already included some proposals how to look at the different teams and groups. Just leave the logo parts out of the quote: I wrote: A) ... officially supported LibreOffice teams (defined by dedicated TDF resources like http://team.libreoffice.org website or team@libreoffice.org mailing list) ... B) ... LibreOffice conference ... similar to A), even if the conference team might not be given a website or mailing lists with the names mentioned in A). C) ... regional marketing teams ... are officially approved by TDF and provided with team@marketing.libreoffice.org mailing lists ... D) Individual community members (approved by the Membership Committee) ... not allowed ... to behave like an official LibreOffice or TDF spokesperson or representative. E) Local teams based on individual community members or supporters not being approved as community members by the MC ... Perhaps you can use some of my ideas here.. drew schrieb: ... so speaking for myself I would make time this coming week to actively engage in a discussion and work on putting a draft together on the wiki with what comes out of such a discussion. Thank you very much for this offer, unfortunately my time is much more restricted than I thought some time ago... Best regards Bernhard -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [steering-discuss] Granting authorization to use the TDF logo for the french local association La Mouette
Hi Charles, all, I'm not a SC member, so my opinion should not be understood as voting. Thorsten Behrens schrieb: Charles-H. Schulz wrote: The French Association La Mouette, co-organising the LibreOffice Conference and representing the french speaking community, is drafting a pamphlet / brochure to be handed out to some specific audience (CIOs - CTOs of specific sectors) . La Mouette is asking us the authorization to use the full TDF/LibreOffice logo (with the TDF outline). La Mouette is the NGO representing the Francophone community. My question is: Are they part of this community or are they a different entity consisting of the same people? As different entity they should *not* use the official logo dedicated to the community and TDF alone. But if the French community creates a pamphlet that is printed and distributed by La Mouette, they have the right to use the full logo. I would like to ask the SC to answer positively to this request. This does not preclude us, however to start this NGOs committee we talked about in 2010 and work with them on collaboration on the local level, as this is only one specific question about a brochure. Hi Charles, if this brochure is positively advertizing TDF/LibreOffice, I see no reason not to endorse it with our official logo - I understand it's presented as kind of a supportive quote from TDF? Even if the brochure advertises TDF/LibreOffice in the most positive light, this doesn't mean that we should allow external entities to behave as if they were the community or TDF. Advertising LibreOffice can be done without any negative impact by using the logo without TDF subline. And for advertising TDF we don't have any rules by now (and no logo different from the LibreOffice logo with subline). So my take in this question would be: Have the brochure created by the French community on their list and let La Mouette distribute it. In this case the brochure is an official resource of the community and therefore allowed to use the logo with subline. Best regards Bernhard PS: If La Mouette is set up as part of the community, this topic would be much easier, but I don't know if their statutes contain such a phrase... -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [steering-discuss] Request for official statement about dedicated logos for community groups
Hi Florian, * Florian Effenberger schrieb: Hi Bernhard, Bernhard Dippold wrote on 2011-05-16 23.31: Therefore I'd like to propose my position as starting point for a SC discussion, leading to a decision we can base our work on and upload to the wiki for future reference. currently working on some older mails... has this already been adressed? There has been a reply by Sophie, but I didn't make out any formal SC discussion or decision on this topic. As this covers more than just design and visual identity questions (definition of teams, how to advertise teams and external groups) I don't think that this decision should be left to any of the teams like marketing or design. Best regards Bernhard -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[steering-discuss] Request for official statement about dedicated logos for community groups
Hello SC members and deputies, there has been a request to use a dedicated LibreOffice logo for a local team at Venezuela, that has not been replied by now in a way that I know what kind of logo is appreciated for such a group. Therefore I'd like to propose my position as starting point for a SC discussion, leading to a decision we can base our work on and upload to the wiki for future reference. What I think is: All officially supported dedicated team logos should consist of - the main LibreOffice logo - the team's name (and short name, if applicable) - an area for a graphic especially designed for this team (team related branding element) For consistency and branding reasons the main visual element should be the LibreOffice logo and the other elements should be positioned in the same area for all the teams. Such a template should be provided by the Design team and can be based on any community members ideas. A) Dedicated logos for officially supported LibreOffice teams (defined by dedicated TDF resources like http://team.libreoffice.org website or team@libreoffice.org mailing list) should contain the logo with TDF subline. B) Logos for LibreOffice conference are similar to A), even if the conference team might not be given a website or mailing lists with the names mentioned in A). C) Logos for regional marketing teams should contain the line .. Marketing Team, but as these teams are officially approved by TDF and provided with team@marketing.libreoffice.org mailing lists, their logo should contain the TDF subline too. D) Individual community members (approved by the Membership Committee) should be allowed to use a logo without TDF containing a subline Community member. This logo could be placed as button on their external website or on a business card (following a design to be provided among our branding resources). This logo is not allowed to be used to behave like an official LibreOffice or TDF spokesperson or representative. E) Local teams based on individual community members or supporters not being approved as community members by the MC should use a logo that contains Supporter of or team name for (e.g. Venezuelan user group for LibreOffice). These logos should respect the branding guidelines (especially background color and whitespace area), but are more free in their design. The design team will provide a template for such logos too. I'd like to create drafts for each of these logos during the next days, but perhaps you can already understand what I mean: Official TDF/LibreOffice teams should get an official logo to identify them. Individuals, supporters and non-official teams can use the LibreOffice logo based on the branding guidelines (and on the trademark policy), but not as approval for any official status - except the status as TDF community member. Best regards Bernhard -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [steering-discuss] Re: User Groups in each country approved LibreOffice
Hi Daniel, SC members, I just want to show you what already has been discussed on this topic. See two links below... Daniel Gonzalez schrieb: On 04/12/2011 08:02 AM, Daniel Gonzalez wrote: Hi all I wonder if there are any process to validate a LUG or TDF Group LibreOffice users in a given country. Venezuela is being born in a group of users after Flisol LibreOffice Caracas and one of the questions that we asked is whether the stand we had and the group that was building had approval by TDF. So far there hispanic community encompassing all Spanish-speaking countries but I think it is necessary to jump to something more localized due to local activities that may be generated in each country. Saying? Greetings Hi Guys Sorry to insist on this thread, but I think it is very important to the community in general LibreOffice The intention is to have your support for the creation of user groups in each country the intention is as follows.[...] I hope they give me their opinions to make progress on this issue. Greetings. There are two threads about creating an official logo for a local team in Venezuela on the design@LibO list: Here are the starting mails of these threads: http://go.mail-archive.com/_Cr8tEWfxl-nFFMByPoYBLpTwGQ= http://go.mail-archive.com/_kfDTmWMFBOVLNA5vrH5G907DzI= I tried to describe the difference between local marketing teams and general language based teams for user support and all the other activities in my replies to these threads. Drew is working on a similar topic for the North American team (he just mentioned this in his last mail in the second thread from above). I hope these links give a bit more background information without taking too much time for you! Best regards Bernhard -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[steering-discuss] Re: [steering-discuss] Confused by our Trademark Policy ...
Hi Charles, all while I'm fine with the TM policy, I think there should be one more case mentioned in the logo policy: Charles M. Schultz wrote Hi there, that's hopefully the last time we do this. When you keep your eye on the Trademark policy, voting should be possible... [...] Our logo guideline got a new paragraph at its beginning explaining clearly the use of the TDF mention. The Logo Policy doesn't cover the use case that TDF wants to present the logo with subline on an external resource - as officially supported reference to LibreOffice and The Document Foundation. Do you want to include such use: http://www.spi-inc.org/projects/libreoffice/ in the policy? Or is it already covered and I didn't see it? Best regards Bernhard -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [steering-discuss] Re: Trademark Policy of the Document Foundation
Hello Charles, all, one single point to clarify: Charles-H. Schulz schrieb: [...] Bernhard Dippold wrote: a) *The product* itself contains the *logo with TDF subline*. We provide these binaries via our mirror system. Distributors of the unmodified binaries are allowed to distribute the product, so they distribute it with the TDF subline inside the product. The mention TDF only applies to what comes out of TDF and the mirrors listed here. But you cannot use the TDF mention on a DVD that's not an official DVD from TDF. So yes, we're talking about unmodified binaries downloaded via our mirroring system, which means: you can only get them by downloading the binaries here or in the specific case of the linux distros (that's explained in the TM policy). This could be understood as if it would not be allowed to distribute the unmodified binaries by other means than via our mirror service. In my understanding it has to be clear that people are allowed to distribute our product, burn it on CD/DVD, copy it on USB-Stick or any other device as long as the binaries have not been modified. This product will (of course, as it is unmodified) contain the logo with TDF subline. But when they refer to this product, print the logo on the label or cover, advertise it on their homepage or present it on a download page, they have to use the logo without subline. Even if they distribute our unchanged product it is necessary to avoid the impression as they would represent the community and/or TDF as producer of the office suite. Did you mean it this way? Best regards Bernhard -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
[steering-discuss] Re: [steering-discuss] libreoffice.org e-mail accounts
Hi Florian, all Florian Effenberger wrote: Hello, as discussed yesterday in the confcall, we're planning to give out official LibreOffice e-mail accounts to people who are community members per the membership committee's decision. [...] My plan is to hand out only e-mail forwarders, not real mailboxes with POP and IMAP, as the latter one requires lots of maintenance. +1 [...] For LibreOffice, I'm a bit hesitant to hand out @libreoffice.org, as this may seem like people are acting on behalf of TDF, causing liability issues. Maybe I'm too touchy, so I'm happy for comments, which is why I am writing this mail. :-) As membership has to be requested and approved in a formal way, I could imagine to include a passus in the formalism where community members declare not to act as representatives or spokespeople for the LibreOffice community or TDF unless they have been approved to do so. Perhaps a mandatory signature like the following would be sufficient: (First Name) Name - LibreOffice community member - In this case a mail address like nickn...@libreoffice.org might be sufficient IMHO. And in case of possible abuse (or deliberate misinterpretation) the community membership can be revoked... If usage of the @libreoffice.org mail address still looks too risky, I'd vote for My plan is actually to have something like volunteer.nickn...@libreofficecommunity.org nickn...@libreofficecommunity.org (or nickn...@libreoffice-community.org) Best regards Bernhard -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
[steering-discuss] Re: [libreoffice-marketing] official source code repository for CD distribution[was: DVD and Jewel case design]
Hi Tom, Tom Davies schrieb: Hi :) I think you need to put the original source code on the Cd. No, it is sufficient to provide a link to the code, but this link must be valid for a reasonable time. Due to server capacities I don't know if TDF will be able to provide such continuously reachable links to every version of LibreOffice, but this should be discussed by the SC (CC'ing the SC-discuss list). If we have a reliable external repository for previous versions (don't know how long they need to be stored - 3 years?), CDs could link there. For DVD with enough space on the disc it is easier to include the sources IMHO. The GPL agreement allows you and/or the library/school to make a small profit from the sale of the Cds and to cover costs. It's LGPL, but this doesn't make a difference, as LGPL refers to GPL. As far a I know there is no clause in the license that hinders anybody to take as much money as wanted for the CDs/DVDs. But I'd like to see us pointing out, that fair use of LibreOffice includes the information about free download from our website, so everybody will have the chance to decide how much she is willing to pay. (And part of the money earned by selling CDs/DVDs could be donated to the community...) I guess an ideal Cd would have the installers for all the various platforms along with the source code but you might want to have different Cds for Windows Mac and possibly Linux. That depends on the goals of the CDs/DVDs. I like the approach of LibreOffice-Box (present state at http://www.libreofficebox.org/, at the moment only in German) providing an ISO with all installers, source code, documentation, extensions and artwork (as well as related open source software) on DVD. But if you want to provide CDs only it might be necessary to divide the installers by language or operating system. Best regards Bernhard -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [steering-discuss] Adoption and implementation of the Community Bylaws
Hi David, SC members, all David Nelson schrieb: Hi SC members, :-) Charles wrote an excellent set of Community Bylaws. I would like to see them officially adopted and applied. And I would like to see the various committees and governance systems in the Community Bylaws set up and become active. The Bylaws have been approved by the SC during their last call (or the one before), so they are already adopted. What needs to be done, is to establish the Membership Committee. This board will decide on the requests to become formal TDF members - a precondition for electing a Board of Directors later on. While the tasks of the BoD are worked on by the SC members by now, the Membership Committee's tasks can't be done by them too. I feel that this is important for the future of LibreOffice. I strongly support the project, and I want to see it succeed. I think we need to take action quite quickly. It is important - no question. But I don't see it as critical as you: The TDF membership doesn't lead to any other workflow or decision making than nowadays. People interested in working on a specific area do the work there - if they understand, that other areas are more important at the moment, they will probably change their focus. After the release of LibO 3.3.0 the Membership committee could start their work in approving all the requests by active community members to become TDF members. This will probably take a several weeks, but the main part of their work will be finished before we start the election process for the Board of Directors, that has to be established in September latest (as proposed by the Steering Committee limiting it's existence to not more than one year). I have noted how the level of involvement and contribution by active community members has tailed off. I have noticed how few user support queries there are on the user support list. It is my impression that the level of contribution to development is also decreasing. This is your impression. Mine is quite different. For me the most important point is how the open source basis for the community is filled with life - and brought to the public. We have ten years history as an open source project, pushed and limited at the same time by the leading habit of Sun/Oracle as main contributor. New contributors need to find their position in the existing community - we don't want to re-event the wheel in areas that have been successful in the past. We have a situation in which a key project resource, the libreoffice.org website, is becoming the center of pushing and pulling for control over its development. Decisions are needed about the website's management (editorial team), and about the future direction of its development (the question of Drupal adoption is becoming extremely disruptive and divisive in this fledgling project). All these decisions will be taken - either by the website team, or (if this team will not be able to find a common way without damaging the community as a whole) by the Steering Committee. But could you please release your website proposal before you request new steps and decisions over and over again? You probably don't have the time to reply to the proposals for a website leading team in your other thread, as you are finishing the website until tomorrow. So I'd ask you to let the community have some time and find a way of common goals and ways to reach them. This will not be possible without discussion. But these discussions will lead to results - they are not superfluous at all. I personally have experienced wanting to implement 2 great initiatives (proactive contact with Linux projects, and organization of interviews with BBC TV and radio for Charles and/or other SC members) only to find certain SC members strongly discouraging me to take action, refusing to give any constructive consideration, or totally ignoring me and not giving any reaction at all on the subject. I can't tell you anything about the BBC contacts you mention, but I see the results of your request for participation at the Linux design teams (to create our logo9: As our infrastructure had not at all been ready to provide a place for the Linux designers to work collaboratively together with the LibO community, they became quiet after a very short period of time (perhaps they turned their back on LibO totally). When we'll reach at them again - after establishing our branding and infrastructure - I don't know who will be interested again... Of course this is mainly a problem of communication - if we would have been able to tell you what is necessary to lead people towards a project and to *keep them active* (and we know that from our experience in OOo), this step could have been coordinated better. But we didn't have the time to prepare everything properly - we have to establish our new infrastructure now... When I have suggested bold initiatives, there have been very
Re: [steering-discuss] Decisions about libreoffice.org English main site management
Hi Christian, David, all, I'm not a SC member, but I'd like to support Christian's proposals: Christian Lohmaier schrieb: Hi David, *, On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 11:33 AM, David Nelsoncomme...@traduction.biz wrote: I'd like to suggest that there should be an editing team officially appointed: An editing team is a good idea, however We definitely need people feeling responsible for their specific area of expertize / interest. By using the SilverStripe features to create pages and let them be reviewed before final publishing we will be able to keep the website quality high while increasing the website team (when people have shown their dedication and skills). - one *English NL* executive editor (with publishing/admin powers), one is not enough, as one might be ill/on vacation, etc. +1 I think native lang contributors are important, but not necessarily the only ones to finally approve every content. Also it doesn't quite fit in the community idea - Charles Schulz, Florian Effenberger and Italo Vignoli as managing editors (with publishing/admin powers). I'd rather have more of managing editors - not sure whether there needs to be a dedicate executive editor position, but rather a couple of managing editors But same as above, the list is too short, esp. as those people are heavily involved in other areas. I don't understand what these managing editors should do :-( Should they decide which content is allowed to be placed on the website, while the executive editor takes only care of the right wording? If so, these three people are way too heavily involved in other important tasks to be consulted with any new paragraph, news item or press release. To kick-start it, it might be enough, but it should quickly be expanded to include other people who have contributed in a reasonable fashion/have proven that they are capable of the task. +1 - one person from Design, Christoph Noack, with author powers, to consult with about buttons and images. I don't otherwise see the Design team playing much of a role in the running of the website, beyond ensuring compliance with the graphic charter (which is principally imposed by the theme). -1 Especially in terms of design, artworkt, etc. you cannot have enough contributors. We need a consistent theming / visual design for the website. But this doesn't mean that every image, screenshot or button has to be created or approved by Christoph. Christoph is our most recognized UX expert, so his word is important in theming and visual structure too. Having one peer contact: Yes, this is desireable (i.e. one who forwards the requests of the website team and reports back the results of the design team). Here I'd like to see two at least like you mentioned above... As it is hard enough to get artwork to put up on the site, you shouldn't artificially limit the amount of possible contributors by only having one person with powers. I don't think that David wants to reduce the number of contributors: A contact person (or two) is good in several cases, as you already stated above, but contributions should be able by all designers (I don't think they need to upload their artwork on their own - a dedicated area in the wiki would help the website authors too). - one or two technical administrators: Christian Lohmaier and Erich Christian (with admin powers). My suggestion would be that they do limit themselves to *technical* administration alone, without any interest in the content side (this is what they currently do with the other NL sites). This should be no problem, as at least we two have other areas to work with as well :-) However I surely have an interest in the content part, since the content in the end determines what features to add to the site, etc. Focus surely is on the technical part. I don't see any reason to restrict any contribution by anybody - especially Christian and Erich have been working on website content for years at OOo. Why shouldn't they be allowed to work here too? - one contributors team, principally of English NL speakers (each member with author powers). Yes, success or failure all depends on the contributors. And this means contributor with different mother language too. Native speakers can serve as proof-readers, as this would lower the barrier for others and reduce the work load for the native speakers. IMHO, if you organize things like this, you will have a tool that is efficiently run and that will provide TDF with the most-effective marketing platform. If you allow the site to be run in a chaotic, uncontrolled manner, I think you'll lose a lot of the benefit it could otherwise bring the foundation. You describe two extreme positions - I think the truth lies in between: We need a team of people feeling responsible for the different areas of work inside the website team. These people should be mentioned as contacts for their area of expertise on the wiki - I don't think
