[tdf-discuss] Good bye to all of the community members knowing my name...
Hi all! After quite an amount of time and a lot of work for LibreOffice and OpenOffice.org before I have to tell you that I'll have to stop my activities in this great community. Even if I tried not to compromise my real life by my LibreOffice activities, I had to realize, that I can't reach this goal, if I'm honest. LibreOffice activities have ever been fun, rewarding and challenging - improving my skills (not only my English) and giving back appreciation that showed me that my work is important to the community. It's hard to step back and let you work on your own. There is so much to do, and even if more and more people start to share their time and expertize with the community, working together on improving LibreOffice, I would really like to spend my time together with you. I met real friends in this community and I hope we'll keep contact even if I unsubscribe from all the LibO lists. Please keep up the great work! Best regards Bernhard -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
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: [tdf-discuss] OCA vs. ICLA: two names - one thing?
Hi Greg, Dennis, Friedrich, all thanks for pointing to this very topic. So if I understand it right, the difference is a legal one with probably minor consequences in code usage: While with ICLA the contributer keeps the copyright on his own (and thus needs personal legal assistance or an additional contract in case of copyright infringement claims) the OCA / JCA allows the entity sharing the copyright to behave as copyright owner in legal conflicts. Both allow the entity to release the code under any license (or single case authorization) they want to. I don't want to discuss the possibility of positive or negative impacts of single sided license changes in comparison to updateable plus licenses. But is there a difference in licensing and code usage by third parties between OCA and ICLA (except the fact, that they can use Apache licensed code without being forced to negotiate with and probably pay fees to Oracle if they don't want to contribute back)? Best regards Bernhard PS: Just one addition to a point below... Greg Stein schrieb: [...] On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 21:17, Dennis E. Hamilton dennis.hamil...@acm.org wrote: [...] With regard to copyright, the Apache ICLA is very much like the license that the terms of use for the openoffice.org site assert that you are providing in making contributions on the site (without having entered into any OCA).[...] While this is true for copyright of contributions not to be included in the product OpenOffice.org, re-usage of the contributions are different (copyleft license on the OOo site, permissive license at Apache) and inclusion of any contribution to the code of OOo was dependent on a signed JCA/OCA, as they have been rejected by Sun/Oracle even if they have been licensed under LGPL. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/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
Re: [tdf-discuss] Hello! ... and lurking :-)
Hi Greg, all, thank you very much for coming here! Your efforts in working on a community united and collaborating as much as possible are really appreciated! Greg Stein schrieb: Hi all, I imagine you've all heard about the proposal[1] to contribute OO.o to the Apache Software Foundation. I've been involved with Apache for well over a decade, on its Board of Directors since 2001, its current Vice Chairman, the VP of Apache Subversion, and was the Chairman for five years. In short: lots of Apache experience. Short introduction from my side: For about 6 or 7 years active member of the OOo community, spent quite an amount of time in helping to avoid a split in the germanophone OOo project back in 2004 (?), became central contributor and coordinator in OOo Art and Branding Project and now here at LibreOffice from Sept. 2010. I've been following and participating in the discussion around the OO.o proposal on the gene...@incubator.apache.org list[1]. One of the threads of that discussion was to reach out to the people in the Document Foundation and the LibreOffice communities. So... that's this email. I'm now subscribed to discuss@df, steering-discuss@df, and libreoffice@freedesktop. I think this list here is the best for discussions about the community, steering-discuss for contacting the Steering Committee members and libO@freedesktop for developers. I intend to lurk regarding all the regular work that you all are doing here. I'll be paying particular attention to any conversations or concerns that you may have about the OOo/Apache stuff, and will attempt to answer questions that you may have. I'm catching up on the archives now. That's what I tried with the general@incubator list - quite challenging at this time ;-) I already wanted subscribe to it and post my question there, but perhaps (due to the emotional style of discussion over there at the moment) it is better to ask you here: In his mail http://www.mail-archive.com/general@incubator.apache.org/msg28210.html Sam Ruby points out, that an incubator proposal has to be discussed in the community before presenting it to Apache. He cites the guidelines for proposals: http://incubator.apache.org/guides/proposal.html The incoming community needs to work together before presenting this proposal to the incubator. Think about and discuss future goals and the reasons for coming to Apache. If this would have been handled in a proper way, Oracle would have discussed this step with the OpenOffice.org community *before*. This would have reduced the traffic at the Apache list to a minimum - leaving out bad blood and lot of noise... As you probably know, defining the OpenOffice.org community has been easy until last September, but now there are two different definitions, depending on whom you ask: While the people working here on LibreOffice understand themselves and the left-over OpenOffice.org as two projects within one community, some people on the OOo lists deny the positive feelings towards OpenOffice.org by the people who decided to create a single-sponsor independent foundation 8 months ago. In their eyes the LibO-supporter lost their right to support OpenOffice.org and feel as OOo community member with their support of LibreOffice. This background is important to know, if you want to understand, what is going on at the Apache list. But not even the remnant OOo project (that lacks an active governing body since all Community Council members not being payed by Oracle have been forced to leave when they announced their dedication to an independent foundation and all present seats should have been re-elected for a long time) has been involved in discussion before Oracle donated the trademark to Apache and IBM (via Rob Weir) proposed the incubator project to Apache. My question is: Wouldn't it be reasonable to have a discussion - and a positive voting for Apache - inside the (smaller or broader) OpenOffice.org community *before* reaching out for Apache? If I understand it right, Apache projects are community projects - not sponsor based projects (even if they have bought the communities trademarks from entities who held them once as legal representatives for the community)? If you have any comments, questions, or concerns, then please feel free to direct them my way (on whatever list). I'm here to listen and understand, and to offer up answers where I can. There are some other points I'd like to mention - like copy-left dedication of the mainly volunteer community who dislike any company increasing their profits by using these volunteers hard work (and lot of time) without giving back anything (not even respect) - but this would lead too far in this single mail. Cheers, -g Welcome here again, Greg! Best regards Bernhard [1] http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/OpenOfficeProposal [2] send mail to general-subscr...@incubator.apache.org if you would like to subscribe and directly
Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Mailing List FAQ
Hi NoOp, * NoOp schrieb: [...] that page is on http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Local_Mailing_Lists/ so even if translated and cleaned up wouldn't suffice. The place for such a FAQ should be on http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/ and apply to all locales. Suggestions: http://www.mozilla.org/about/forums/etiquette.html http://www.ubuntu.com/support/community/mailinglists [Technical guidelines - in particular] http://www.openoffice.org/ml_guidelines.html Friedrich Strohmaier already asked for someone to translate the German wiki page on netiquette (now part of the German mailing list wiki page) to English in order to link from every mail to the list: http://go.mail-archive.com/da0-BS6BGJYuOt7LR964ojFN2H4= Unfortunately he didn't get any positive reply... [...] That said, here is a question; how can a common user be expected to possibly find http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Local_Mailing_Lists/ to begin with? I see no link on http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/ do you? It takes two clicks on links in the first two lines of the webpages: 1. Click on Local/Regional in the first line of the page. 2. Click on refer to the local and regional mailing lists table on our wiki in the second line of the page. With a larger screen you might read this line already at the bottom of your visible screen, so you could reach the wiki page already with one click. But in general you're right: An average user will hardly read the text and might miss the link. Would you please send a better proposal to the website list? Or if you could put your proposal in the SilverStripe CMS (request for write access on the website list) and let it approve by a SilverStripe admin, it's integration would take even less time. Best regards Bernhard -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/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: [tdf-discuss] desktop integration
Hi Valentin, all, Valentin schrieb: Hello guys! I tested today the latest LibreOffice builds (beta 5 of 3.4) and I saw the better desktop integration in the Ubuntu-Desktop (10.10). Good work! But ... since years there is one thing, that I absolutely don't like. It's this gradient on the drop down-Button: http://www.pic-upload.de/view-9943211/gradient.png.html It's possible to make look the button a bit more nicer? Keep up the good work, thank you for all! Can you provide a button with a better gradient? If so, we could ask the developers to have a look at the code and find the relevant string to replace the image (if it is an image - if it's just a gradient, we might not be able to modify it easily more than just in the colors of the end points). It would be great if you could join the design team (http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Design#Communication) for such tasks. Best regards Bernhard -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [tdf-discuss] LibreOffice Math: There is no
M Henri Day schrieb: 2011/5/4 Christian Lohmaierlohmaier+ooofut...@googlemail.com On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 8:19 PM, M Henri Daymhenri...@gmail.com wrote: 2011/5/4 Robert Dermanrobert.der...@pressenter.com [...] (for me at least), it is not the hex code, but rather the decimal code that must be used to import the glyph ; thus entering «2204» (without the quotation marks) in the tool gives me the desired ∄, whereas entering «089c»gives me a glyph I cannot read ࢜ with the fonts I have installed on Nope - that's double conversion you're doing here.. 2204 is already hex value. that in decimal would be 8708 While probably not so useful for this case, you can also modify windows keyboard layouts to have access to more key-combinations. http://microsoft.com/globaldev/tools/msklc.mspx ciao Christian I'm not quite sure I follow you here, Christian ; 089c is the hexadecimal representation of the number represented by the decimal 2204 ((12x16⁰ + (9x16¹) + (8x16²)), so I don't understand where the «double conversion» comes in. As I understand it, 2204 is the decimal and 089c the hexadecimal code for the glyph «∄», and the first page of Table de caractères Unicode ( http://unicode.coeurlumiere.com/) would seem to back me up. Your example describes it differently: On page 3 [1] it shows the glyph in the line 2200 at fifth position out of 16. Therefore it is Unicode 2204, as the columns stand for the last position in the four digit code. But the line above is 21F0 - and the last 6 columns in each line stand for the fourth position of the code as A to F. These numbers can't be decimal - they are hexadecimal. Nobody would try to convert let's say 220A (just 5 characters behind 2204), the small epsilon sign, to Hex again. By the way, the small number above the sign is the decimal number. I don't know if this helps at all, I just wanted to tell... Best regards Bernhard [1]: http://unicode.coeurlumiere.com/?n=8192 -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/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
Re: [tdf-discuss] using information from OOo lists for LibO marketing? (was: Fwd: [users] Licensing Details)
Hi James, all, I'm not part of the SC, but like Drew and Andy a longtime OOo community member - perhaps I can shed a bit of light on the issue... James Wilde schrieb: On Apr 21, 2011, at 23:09 , drew wrote: On Thu, 2011-04-21 at 22:40 +0200, M Henri Day wrote: 2011/4/21 drewd...@baseanswers.com On Thu, 2011-04-21 at 19:05 +0200, M Henri Day wrote: 2011/4/21 James Wildejames.wi...@sunde-wilde.com Just got this message in my inbox. I wonder if sending him a note about LibO would be considered to be in breach of the comprehensive warning at the bottom. About this main question: I don't know the sender, but in most cases of such mails people are not aware of sending their full address and contact details to an public mailing list when they write a mail from their office. If you cite such people you probably do them a favor if you cut this information in your reply. In this case I feel a bit different, as the sender is senior manager of an IT company. So my take is: Yes - the footer doesn't hinder you to reply to his request. But... //James Begin forwarded message: From: SAEED AHMEDsaeed.ah...@3i-infotech.xxx Date: April 20, 2011 15:34:31 GMT+02:00 To: us...@openoffice.orgus...@openoffice.org Subject: [users] Licensing Details [...] That's all well and good - but - contacting him is simply _wrong_ IMO. In my eyes it depends on the content of this reply. He asked a question on the OpenOffice.org users list, not LibreOffice. Right. So if James replies, he should answer his question on the license of OpenOffice.org. What Drew and Andy don't want to support, is subversive LibreOffice marketing against OpenOffice.org. Even if the rest of the community didn't follow us by now, we don't think that OpenOffice.org is a competitor we have to fight against by all possible means. In my eyes it is allowed to inform about LibreOffice while replying to the question on OOo license, perhaps linking to the Oracle announcement from last Friday: As there might be major modification in OpenOffice.org community and product structure, he should keep an eye on what's going on in the near future. If this announcement would cause him uncertainty about OOo's future, it might be reasonable to have a look at LibreOffice. We should not compete against each other - especially in a situation where none of us know, what will happen to the OOo community. Perhaps we get a chance to re-unite: Then competitive marketing might be an issue that adds negative feelings we should avoid. Competitive marketing is not the way to go for LibreOffice: Italo Vignoli, our marketing spokesperson, mentioned this point in several mails on various lists: We stand *for* our community and our product and not *against* others. To forward such a message here was wrong I agree, but this doesn't mean that this topic is wrong on our discuss list. You might have asked your question without copying the OP mail - and have chosen a more descriptive subject ;-) and such actions should NOT be tolerated. As non-native speaker, this part sounds too hard to me. It's a valid question how we interact with the OOo community we left behind us. And if people want to use information from over there to do marketing against them, nobody will be able to hinder them. But this is not the way I think is the official position of the LibreOffice community. Even if they decided not to follow our way by one or another reason, these are the people we worked with for several years - and we liked working together. Florian was very sad that he had to resign from his OOo Marketing Lead post - and so did the former OOo Community Council members here in the SC as well as many others. Tolerance is important - for different opinions as well as for working in two communities. But that's just my personal opinion... [...] If James truly believes it is appropriate to respond to a query of this nature, made on the OpenOffice.org mailing list, with a recommendation to use a different application then he should (must) be willing to do so in the open, on that mailing list. It's just a gut feeling, but this seems to be more honest than a private mail. A mail to the users list will have to be phrased in a way telling just the facts about LibreOffice without doing any harm to OOo. A private mail could be considered as bad marketing for us, because LibreOffice stands for openness and transparency. [...] Recently there was some discussion about the decision of the European Union to renegotiate with Microsoft about new licenses for Office, [...] I don't know whether TDF actually did anything about it, but there was a lot of agreement that they should do. I think a SC member did blog about this topic, but I'm not sure. Now someone has made information available on a public list which could be beneficial to TDF in a similar though smaller way, and I have decided that I see no problem with making use of that public information. In my eyes this is
[tdf-discuss] Re: [tdf-discuss] How to pronounce the name (again, sorry)
Hi all, Italo Vignoli wrote: I am not a native English speaker, but I think that liberty - which has the same root of libre - is not pronounced as laiberty. I have heard many native English speakers pronounce libre, and they all pronounce it the same way. On 3/30/11 8:37 AM, M Henri Day wrote: What, pray, is «the English pronunciation of libre» ? If the first vowel is to be pronounced as «aɪ» as in, say, «live», it differs vastly from the customary pronunciation in almost all European languages - Germanic as well as Romance - which is much closer to «iː», and can hardly serve as «the reference for every language» I agree with both of you: Even if library is pronounced differently, I'd like to hear libre to be pronounced like Libra, the zodiac balance sign. Unlike to liberty, the i is a long vowel. This is the most ambiguous pronounciation issue, so I think we should address it by providing a recommendation. Pronounciation of the b might be different for some roman languages (turning to a v like livre), but that's hardly an issue, as it sounds quite similar. Same non-issue with the r (rolling in different ways, not rolling at all): These differences are marginal in my eyes. If the e is spoken or not depends on the speaker too: French people tend to skip it, others pronounce it. I remember my first OOoCon when I found out that most speakers talked about OpenOffice - dot - org while I was used to OpenOffice org in German. It didn't take long that I used the dot version in English, while I stayed without in German. It will probably the same in your local community too: You will agree to one pronounciation once you met personally (on a fair or at any other event). Perhaps this version is not the one used by the majority of community members when they speak English. Don't think you *must* fit any official pronounciation. if we could agree on an English version with long i like Libra instead of ai like library, this would probably help spreading the word in a similar way, but any other example should be just an example. Best regards Bernhard -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: How to pronounce the name (again, sorry)
Charles Marcus schrieb: Can we please stop with all of this nonsense about how to pronounce the name? Can you just skip or delete the mails of any thread your are not interested in? Best regards Bernhard -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] Icon in dialog box
Hi Eduardo, all Sorry for replying late... Eduardo Moreno schrieb: Hi, I am create a Macro, and when us run, the icon in dialog box is the icon of OpenOffice.org. Could you please provide a screenshot - together with your version of LibreOffice and your platform/distribution ? I can't see any OpenOffice.org icons in the macro dialog. As the mailing list doesn't allow attachments at the moment, please upload the screenshot to some webspace or our wiki and provide the link. If you prefer sending it directly to me, please confirm, that you allow me to upload it to our wiki under the CC-by-sa license. Best regards Bernhard -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
[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 ***
Re: [steering-discuss] Re: Trademark Policy of the Document Foundation
Hi Charles, * CC'ing the design list... (follow-up on the logo design should be there, on the general questions here on steering-discuss) Charles-H. Schulz schrieb: Hi, @Bernhard: now we just need the logos without the TDF mention to be put on a page with its source on the wiki, and I think we'll be ready to announce our trademark policy Do you think you or Christoph can do that? Great to hear that - but I didn't know that this logo is a precondition for the announcement. I'm sorry that we didn't finalize the logo - main problem is, that there is a reasonable reason to modify the logo a bit, but we didn't manage to discuss the advantages and disadvantages in detail. As you know there are important task to work on *right now* - and we still do this without having defined the general visual basis for our community... Following the Branding Guidelines it is possible to use one or two parts of the tripartite logo (symbol, libreoffice text and TDF text) alone, so it is possible to create the logo without TDF subline by using the present logo. I don't know how strong you see the relationship between the logo and the trademark announcement, but I can live very well with this version of our logo for some time - perhaps until the release of LibreOffice 3.4, when we might introduce the updated logo (just my personal opinion - we'll discuss this on the design list). When I find the time tonight, I'll be working on the logos. Just to be sure I understood how you (and the trademark policy?) want to propose the use of our logos: 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. b) *We* refer to the product and our community on our website, on marketing material, fair booths and other means by a *logo with TDF subline*. This is only allowed for - official community representatives (SC and board members described in the bylaws). - officially approved international, language based or regional teams (including TDF members approved by the Membership Committee, so their work is led by the Community Bylaws) in consent with their dedicated mailing lists. If there is any doubt on the team's legitimation, a formal request here at the steering-discuss list is necessary. c) *Single community members* and *other people* referring to our product and the community are not allowed to use the logo with TDF subline. This should avoid misinterpretation of their references as official community statements and presentations. They should use the new *logo without this subline* we're going to provide. What logo should be used if external references point to the foundation? Do we need a logo for The Document Foundation (once it is established) without the LibreOffice text? Do you think of another possibility to distinguish official usage and external reference? 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: [tdf-discuss] Nice new download site.
Hi Rainer, * Robert Holtzman schrieb: On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 11:09:15AM +0100, Rainer M Krug wrote: Hi After I raised that issue recently, I would like to say congratulations to a nice download site. Thank you! David and Ivan worked hard on the content and design of the new website, supported by Christian and Klaus-Jürgen. I don't know who created the download selector (IIRC Christian or Stefan), but I'll forward your mail to the website mailing list, so everybody involved can read it. What are you replying to and why, apparently, did you start a new thread? Apparently Rainer was one of the many people asking for an improved download page when the site went life. Now he wants to congratulate the team for the new download page (perhaps for the entire site - It seems that he isn't a native speaker). You probably have already seen the present page: http://www.libreoffice.org/download Best regards Bernhard -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] Introduction/New Website Bugs
Hi Daniel, * Welcome to our community! Daniel Neel schrieb: Hello all. My name is Daniel Neel and I'm interested in working on LibreOffice's new Drupal-based web site. I'm sorry if this disappoints you, but our new website is based on SilverStripe (an easy to be used CMS): http://www.libreoffice.org Once our website is in a final state, we'll be able to discuss any further improvement. This might be Drupal, but at the moment there are other tasks, that are much more urgent than such a discussion. I have experience developing with (X)HTML and CSS on a couple of web sites and have dabbled with Python and other technologies from time to time. At the moment our website team is forming - do you want to join? This would be great. Please subscribe to the website mailing list (by sending a mail to website+subscr...@libreoffice.org and reply to the automated mail you get) and introduce you there, if you want to. Anyways, I reviewed the new LibreOffice web site and recorded issues I found. Is it possible for me to fix these bugs myself, or would I need to be granted commit rights? At the moment the Drupal staging site is not worked on, so I'd propose to add your findings to the wiki: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Website/Drupal/Feedback I don't know if this Drupal solution will be more than a working draft, but this would allow to come back to them, when the work on the LibreOffice website has reached a final state and our discussions on the long-term solution came to a conclusion. Please don't discuss any Drupal ideas at the moment, because they led to long and unproductive discussions in the past and we need to focus on the release now. If you follow the website list, you will find out, when we'll have the time to develop our goals and aims for the long-term website solution that will fit the needs of the entire community. Best regards Bernhard -- Web site bugs All notes taken using Chromium 8.0.552.237 (70801) Ubuntu 10.10, referring to the Drupal web site at http://libreofficeaustralia.org/ Navigation bar - the sub menu of the LibreOffice item doesn't appear to align along the navigation bar's left edge, while the other items align correctly Home Page - Take a tour to explore the functions and features of LibreOffice should inlude a period after LibreOffice - all other items end in periods. - The shadows under each image might look better feathered a bit more, with less hard edges - The shadow under the puzzle icon doesn't appear centrally aligned while the other shadows do - Login or register to post comments Older polls - might be useful to have the links highlighted/underlined, as they're (in chrome 8) indistinguishable from normal text without mousing over them. - Also in chrome 8 and firefox 3.6 the Older polls item should be on a new line - currently a little confusing LibreOffice/Calc - url doesn't follow the naming convention of other LibO products. Listed as ../features/libreoffice-calc rather than ../features/calc - This also might affect the page's title which is LibreOffice Calc | LibreOffice.org when it should be Calc | LibreOffice.org, going by the other product pages - also is the cause of a broken link on the Features page Download - uses an old Apple logo - not sure if their newer logos are available for use or not - also uses an old Ubuntu logo rather than the updated ones (located here: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Brand) Download/Extensions - Discover new possibilities, Extensions make document creation fun., Explore and install now - inconsistent use of periods Features - Space between heading and start of page content inconsistent with other pages (the space between Features and LibreOffice is a comprehensive...) Features/Accessibility - Inconsistent spacing between heading and start of page content Community/ - Items in the large list aren't presented in the same order as in the navigation bar - Page titles are inconsistent (see Project Teams and Forums vs the other items) Community/Project Teams - Contains links to two seperate Quality Assurance team pages, each with differing content Community/Forum - Sub-forum titles become un-aligned depending on if there's an icon to the left of them (see mail icon) and if the thread has a mail icon and a description of the sub-forum (potentially in other cases as well) News - Assuming the language bar should go below the To suggest a news article please contact the News Editor team section. All product pages (LibreOffice/... Calc/Writer/etc) - Inconsistent spacing between the navigation bar and the start of the page's content -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] An Interesting Mockup
Hi Paulo, all Paulo José schrieb: Hi everyone, I'm the mock-ups creator. It's the firt time that I use a mail list like that and english is not my own language, so I'm not sure if I'm doing it right. You are. Welcome to our community and to this list! One thing you couldn't know before is that there are different teams working on dedicated mailing lists. The best place for your mockup to be discussed is the design mailing list des...@libreoffice.org, where the team for visual design / branding design and UI/UX design is located. Please have a look at our wiki area (even if it is far from being in a final state): http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Design It would be great if you would be interested to join our team. Just subscribe to the mailing list by sending a mail to design+subscr...@libreoffice.org and reply to the automated response. First, thank you Animesh Meher for starting this threat. I totally agree with Zaphod for a decent discussion on the LibO's UI. Everybody else interested in UI / UX is invited to join us there too. [... personal statements ...] And if you could tell the team over there who you are (just like you did here), everybody would know about your background. Best regards and welcome again! Bernhard -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] An Interesting Mockup
Hi Animesh, all, animesh meher schrieb: The Mock-ups are posted in omgubuntu.co.uk and www.webupd8.org and seems to be getting good positive response. I certainly Agree we should have a revert to old style as an option for power user. But for new user this is attractive and much easier to use. Can we do a usuablity study and come to a agreement and get someone to start working . Usability studies are very reasonable for such kind of work. The OpenOffice.org UX project (whose Co-lead is one of our main UX experts here) has worked on this topic for more than a year and we can follow our way based on this efforts. But to reach the entire UX team I'd ask you to continue this discussion on the des...@libreoffice.org list. If you or someone else would be able to provide an abstract of this thread, this would be great. Please be aware that we are in the final state before our first release, so it might be possible, that some people are working hard on this topic, not able to reply in a short period of time... Best regards Bernhard PS: And with regards to your last part of the final phrase get someone to start working - this might become the most challenging part (while consensus finding might be hard work as well): As a volunteer community we can't force anybody to work on the feature we like most - and I don't know any sponsors interested in spending their money on this specific feature to pay the developer... -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/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
Re: [tdf-discuss] Drupal discussion once more :-( [was: Addons]
Hi Marc, Michael, all, Marc Paré schrieb: Disclaimer: I am on the Drupal team and think that this is the better solution for the LibreOffice CMS solution. It's your right to think what you want to - you are even allowed to post your thoughts ;-) ... as long as these postings don't cause hindrances and drawbacks to the LibreOffice community. The SC decision was clear in one point: We need to create the LibreOffice website in the shortest possible time - and therefore SilverStripe was the CMS to start with and Drupal will be an option for the future. [...] It is therefore logical to consider that [...] if a group decides to work on a Drupal solution, it is their prerogative and, that these contributing members will therefore be able to work on this solution as their time permits. If so many of these members decide to work on the Drupal solution to the detriment of the Silverstripe solution, then, again, the SC will perhaps have to reconsider its choice of CMS accordingly. You're totally right. But the reconsideration might be different than you think of... I just rephrase your last sentence according to the SC decision: If so many of the community members decide to work on a version that might become a solution in the further future instead of contributing to the urgently needed short term solution, then the SC might have to reconsider its decision in a way that leads to more contributors for the website we need *now* - not later on. Of course it it everybody's free choice to work in any area of our community. But if this work begins to hinder other *more important* and *really necessary* work, it is on the Steering Committee's agenda to find a way that leads in the right direction. I'm not a member of the SC, so it's just my personal suggestion: Please avoid *any* action that might been understood as inviting people to the Drupal team instead of the general website team. Our website needs to represent the high quality of our product and the professionalism of our community - at the latest when LibO 3.3 will be released. If you don't see this urgency - or think it has lower priority than working on the Drupal site - you might be considered as not supporting the LibreOffice community, but want to establish a Drupal branch inside LibO. If you have the skills to work on the short term goal, so please donate your time and expertise to the community. The community doesn't need any work on the Drupal site now: It lacks of website content, design improvement and active contribution on the SilverStripe site. For the last three weeks David Nelson has done a tremendous work, creating the current LibO website from scratch without any help and improving the design now (together with one or two others being able to spend a bit of their time). In the meantime you created a Drupal website, filled it with content and created your own design around it. Please consider to contribute to the *real* website from Jan 10th on, when David presents his new design. If the Drupal site seems to have outpaced that of the Silverstripe, the credit should go to the Drupal team contributors who are more adept at creating a Drupal CMS site. It would make no sense to ask a Drupal experienced contributors to slow down because the Silverstripe team is not able to keep up to their development. As you read several times in this thread and elsewhere on the mailing lists, TDF and LibO are not AGAINST anything, they are FOR! This is not only meant for marketing activities outside the community, but even more for interactions inside the LibO community! So your competitive attitude AGAINST the SilverStripe team should be reconsidered in my opinion - especially as the SilverStripe team consists of the people who want to have a high quality website at the time of the LibO release! The Drupal team is currently working hard to deliver this solution within the 6 months delay accorded by the SC. It may, in fact, be able to present to the membership a working site within an earlier time frame that was firstly accorded, thanks to the team's hard work. And then the Drupal team might see that their work can't be considered by the relevant people in the community, because they still work hard on the existing website... I could imagine that the SC postpones any activity on Drupal until the *real thing* is in a professional state... It will then be up to the membership to give constructive criticism to the newly worked Drupal site to see if this is what will work best for LibreOffice. After all, the same is happening in the documentation team with their different projects. Let's keep an open mind. I'm not involved in documentation, so I can't comment on the activities there. But I don't know about a SC decision for one solution now and considering another solution later on. Here *is* a clear decision by the highest board in LibreOffice: We need the SilverStripe site *first* and will consider Drupal *later*. Open mind doesn't
Re: [tdf-discuss] Test documents to compare interoperability [was: Do not support writing to OOXML format]
Hi Barbara, all, Barbara Duprey schrieb: On 1/2/2011 2:29 PM, Italo Vignoli wrote: On 1/2/11 8:15 PM, Barbara Duprey wrote: Italo, one of the things that would make me (and maybe others here) feel better about OOXML support is if writing to the XP formats causes LibO to make compromises that do not have to be made going to OOXML. That is, if documents developed under an ODF application can be converted to a higher-quality product, in terms of compatibility of features and formatting, when going to OOXML (even in the Transitional formats) than they can when going to XP. Is that the case? [...] I do not know if writing OOXML has a higher level of compromises than writing in the old MS proprietary formats, because I am not a technical expert and I trust on developers and engineers for these issues. I suppose that there are different compromises. [...] So I'd like to know what that is -- and there still seems to be a possibility that for new documents constructed in LibO, writing the XP formats provides better interoperability than writing the OOXML ones. That's not a FOR or AGAINST issue, it's a matter of product quality. It would be good to have some test documents, to convert them from one of the formats to the others and find out the best interoperability solution for the present versions of the different software packages. This is a task for community members owning the MSO packages as well as LibO. They don't need any programming skills, they don't need to be experts in marketing, QA, UX or any other part of the community, but they will probably support the work of all these groups with the result of their work. So, if anybody wants to provide a substantial contribution as mentioned in the Community Bylaws, this might be a topic to work on. But as this mail is buried under a huge discussion, she/he should start a new thread, ask for co-workers, define the test documents and help us all with the results. Best regards Bernhard -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Do not support writing to OOXML format
Hi Larry, all, Larry Gusaas schrieb: On 2011/01/02 12:47 PM Italo Vignoli wrote: If you want to have a say in software development you are welcome to contribute to the code As I know Italo (not being a programmer himself) quite well, I know that his reply could have been easier for you to understand, if he added more information: Our community consists of several groups with several tasks. Every group has it's own expertize and inside these groups people know each other and know about their expertize and position in our community. Software development is done by code contributors. They can write the code they want, but only the code bringing more positive aspects than negative ones will be included in the package. If other groups see problems in some code contributions, they start to discuss this topic with the coders, providing them with the expertize on the specific context (User Experience is a good example, the topic here might belong to Marketing) and trying to convince them, that the negative aspects are more valid than the positive ones. If they don't get to a common conclusion, the last decision will be taken by the Board of Directors, at the moment by the Steering Committee until the BoD will have been elected. So only people who write code have a say in the development of LibreOffice? What about people who do the QA? Or the people providing support? (I mainly provide support for OOo, mainly for Mac users) I hope you understand the basis of meritocracy - so all the contributors are relevant in *their specific area of expertize* This thread shows several thoughts and positions towards the OOXML write support in LibO. Some people want to get rid of it, some want to have it moved to a different place in the program (export, extension), some want to provide a clearer description of the negative aspects of the format. Others want to keep it as it is and evolve it towards better quality. So how can we find out, which way is the right one to go? Surely not by following the loudest or most active posters in this thread. I don't know if you are involved deeply enough in our community to know about the position of one of another contributor to this thread. I'm quite sure that I miss some of the relevant people, but please have a look at the postings by the Steering Committee members: Thorsten Behrens (code developer), who mentioned that it is necessary to work on the OOXML filters now, because this is the only way to provide high quality at the time MS drops their .doc support. Italo Vignoli (marketing expert and official marketing contact for TDF) pointing several times to the necessity to provide the best solution for our (present and future) users, proposing to avoid any marketing strategy against Microsoft and to leave education about more open standard in ODF to our marketing group instead of removing existing code from the sources. I could mention Charles-H. Schulz, Sophie Gautier, Cor Nouws and others, but the main fact is: All the points mentioned in this thread have been taken into consideration by the Steering Committee and the developers. Thus it was really important to raise such kind of questions. We are a community where concerns are heard. But repeating them don't impose a higher relevance to them. So despite good reasons to abandon the write support for OOXML from our standard save-as dialog, the reasons to keep it are more important. It might be quite easy to change the wording of the warning text when saving in non-ODF document formats (different texts for MS proprietary and quasi-open formats might need more programming skills), so if someone provides an improved text as patch - or finds a programmer willing to build a patch from such wording - I'm quite sure that this will find positive consideration. In my eyes this thread has been reached a size that covers most of the aspects of the subject, so I'd like to see it ending soon. If someone is interested in collecting all the opinions mentioned here in a wiki page, it would be easier to point there, when someone (without knowledge of all the mails here) restarts a similar topic again. You can take your elitist developer attitude and stuff it. Pleas stop such comments, they don't lead to any positive result. Thanks in advance! Bernhard PS: And to come back on your very first statement, the agreement between Microsoft and Novell: Even if some Novell employees work on our code, even if they contributed Go-oo code - this doesn't mean that they have to follow their employers opinion in their spare time. TDF is open to contributors from more than one company, so dependency is much less relevant than at OOo. And if you have a look at the Credits page in your LibO version, you can compare the contributor's names with Go-oo contributors (or a list of Novell employees, if you have one): Only a minority of our contributors are paid by Novell. TDF
Re: [steering-discuss] Last night's announcement
Hi Flo, * I'm not a SC member, but just want to add my thoughts: Florian Effenberger schrieb: Hi, I'm sorry to say, but last night's announcement hasn't been delivered to all announce@ subscribers, and is also missing from our official archives. The problem was that the timeout on the mailserver per default was set too low, and thus, with our large subscribers list, after a certain amount of time it just killed the sendout. I hopefully fixed the problem, but I can't tell the missing recipients, Do you know if the mails have been sent according their subscription time or their name / email address? (I got the mail for example) If you can find out, there would be quite a good chance to do c.) on just a part of the list - without annoying many people with a double mail. so we have three choices: a.) Do nothing, as this was just an RC. b.) Re-send the announcement. c.) Re-send the announcement with the information that some recipients were missing. d) point to the announcement on the website (if it is uploaded there) by a mail to all the lists except of announce (containing info about the partial delivery). Inform the native lang groups to tell it to their contributors. This would probably reach most of the people interested in RC2 (together with blogging etc) Best regards Bernhard -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org List archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/steering-discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Name Change for LibreOffice Applications
Hi Johannes, * just one remark about your last paragraph: Johannes A. Bodwing schrieb: [...] Who from TDF/LO has the overview of the most effiency schedule for major steps of the TDF/LO-project? I don't think that such a task can be done by one single person - it has been done as a common task by different teams. Development team knows (more or less) about the skills of the developers working on the LibO source. But as they are volunteers, their areas of interest have to been taken into account: Nobody can be forced by anybody else to work on a specific task. They can be convinced of course (by defining common goals - or paying an adequate amount of money...). Marketing works on public relations and will be the main area for defining our community goals and target groups - based on the Next Decade Manifesto [http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/TDF/Next_Decade_Manifesto]. Many other teams will have to be taken into account, so there will have to be a group of active community members from all of these teams, sharing their knowledge based on the expertize in their teams with each other and the community. At the moment such a group is the Steering Committee, after the first voting the Board of Directors (BoD) IMHO. When discussion in the different teams led to conclusions, they should be finalized on the steering-discuss list, where all the community members interested in this topic - and I hope it is important to every community member - can follow the discussion. Is there someone who says what has to come next to build the project in its best way with the personal it has at the moment? For tasks not to be covered inside the dedicated teams this should be the SC - led by the experts from the different areas. And could it be helpful to have such a schedule on the webiste of TDF and all national groups, with a rough timetable and permanently refreshed? Of course! Such a schedule should be created by every team, there are already some Work-item pages on the wiki - from the marketing team for example: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Marketing/Work_Items It might be very helpful for the progress we want to do as a whole, if there would be some community members collecting the tasks and their planned timeframes from the different schedules to a central document. The TDF work-item wiki page http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/TDF/Work_Items already provides something similar. I just don't know, if it might be possible to keep such a document readable and up-to-date for more than a few months... Best regards Bernhard -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
[steering-discuss] Add LGPL as license for wiki uploads?
Hi all, Florian suggested to ask this question here: Would it be reasonable to add LGPL as license to the uploads to the TDF wiki? At the moment we only allow no license specified and Creative Commons Attribution Share-Alike 3.0 Unported I'd like to add LGPL 3.0+ as possible license and could imagine to have CC BY-SA + LGPL as standard selection. The background of my question: At the moment we work on the LibO mimetype icons and upload the source files to the wiki. If they would be licensed right from the beginning under LGPL, the final icons could easily be integrated in the product without asking every contributor for licensing their work under LGPL. This might be true for other graphics too when we start working on the Community Branding. I could imagine other parts of the package that might be handled in a similar way (menu icons, templates, gallery items ...). I'm not a license expert, but nobody told me about negative aspects of such a double license strategy by now, so I just wanted to post my ideas... Best regards Bernhard PS: Is the CC license upgradeable? We know about the problems of LGPL without the + feature. Even if the wiki content might not be as crucial as product code, an upgradeable license could make sense IMHO. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org List archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/steering-discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] Bring up libreoffice.org website to world *now*
Hi Johannes, * Johannes A. Bodwing schrieb: Sorry people, ... As long as the LibO website is under construction you will find it here: http://www.test.libreoffice.org But I think that's not the first page for www.libreoffice.org at this state of the project. Why? LO and TDF are at the beginning. So many people don't know what it is and why they should use it. In this phase the Start-Side or Home-Side has to be created under the points of marketing, as a Wow-Side. Please propose your valid ideas on the website mailing list or - if you have some spare time - perhaps you could work on the site directly (with the built-in editor SilverStripe is quite easy to be used). Any help is highly appreciated! Best regards Bernhard [... removed the proposal ...] -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] Bring up libreoffice.org website to world *now*
Hi Johannes, * Johannes A. Bodwing schrieb: Hi Bernhard, ... Please propose your valid ideas on the website mailing list or - if you have some spare time - perhaps you could work on the site directly (with the built-in editor SilverStripe is quite easy to be used). I have no spare time, but I'll try to squeeze it into 24 hours of the day - where can I find this website mailing list? On http://www.documentfoundation.org/contribution/ : # webs...@libreoffice.org: Discussions on maintaining and enhancing our website, wiki, planet and other infrastructure Subscription: website+subscr...@libreoffice.org Digest subscription: website+subscribe-dig...@libreoffice.org Archives: http://www.libreoffice.org/lists/website/ Mail-Archive.com: http://www.mail-archive.com/webs...@libreoffice.org/ GMANE: http://dir.gmane.org/gmane.comp.documentfoundation.libreoffice.website Best regards Bernhard -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] Bring up libreoffice.org website to world *now*
Hi Johannes, all, Johannes A. Bodwing schrieb: [...] But another Sorry - I think this point (Wow) has to be discussed basicly, not only for the website. Because the style of the website will just follow the fundamental goals of LO/TDF. The basic goals of the foundation are presented on the website: http://www.documentfoundation.org/foundation/ First paragraph Our mission For LibO there is the Next Decade Manifesto: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/TDF/Next_Decade_Manifesto but we already started a discussion about our goals in two threads here and on the marketing mailing list (linked from the contribute web page like the website list). Please search for subjects like Briefing and LibO Mission Statement. These discussions have been postponed until the present workload (release of LibO 3.3.0) has been reduced, but after that we'll discuss these topics with major impact on our marketing, branding and general positioning (including product shaping). Thorsten Wilms already created a wiki page about this topic. See his mail on the marketing list: http://go.mail-archive.com/rQTf6g7Dp54w3LrTWBywEOFW2l8= If you want, you can add your thoughts there, so they will not be forgot when we start this discussion... Best regards Bernhard -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] main LibO website content [was: deb installer - have to manually modify link]
Hi David, * This thread certainly belongs to webs...@libo, because such details should be discussed among all people interested in this area. As I read there, some community members already put content on these pages, and at least Marc and Michael wanted to contribute to the Silverstripe site too - so discussing here might result in double work. More comments below... David Nelson schrieb: [...] On Tue, Dec 7, 2010 at 22:04, Christian Lohmaier lohmaier+ooofut...@googlemail.com wrote: Well I'm kind of puzzled that after weeks and weeks, scores of messages in the lists and various conference calls, there's very little concrete progress with producing content. Yes, I'm also very disappointed at that, but I don't have an answer as to why that is so :-( I personally just did not have enough time to come up with content myself, and I was hoping for the marketing team to come up with some content... (and also with some artwork) Sorry for not providing any artwork - but there has not been any request, neither on webs...@libo, nor on marketing or des...@libo (the latter might be the appropriate list IMHO). Probably this is due to the fact that nobody really had the time / dedication to work on these pages. So I still hope this might change. I can propose an IA. Already we can work with the specific items you mentioned below. Let's get started with those, and I will probably find some suggestions to put to you. I'm quite sure that the people working on the pages up to now did have some ideas how to organize the website. Some of them already created native-lang pages, so you should ask them for their structure. Just unpublishing their content without contacting them on the list before might have annoyed them - they might have thought you don't respect their work on structure and content but just want to publish your ideas. I use Gimp and Photoshop, so I can do any needed stuff, too. If you want to, you're welcome to do so. Please be aware that the website should reflect our visual design - even if this is not finished yet, I'd like to see all artwork integrate the design of the TDF logo and the other graphics provided at the wiki: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Marketing/Branding You might also want to refer to the installer and start center images: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/File:LibreOffice-Initial-Artwork-Package.zip But it might be easier to ask at the design list for support in this area. [...] Source files: no, I only have the files as they appear on the site. https://github.com/tdf/cms-themes/tree/master/tdf/images/buttons They can already serve as a basis. We can see what else is needed as I start posting content for consideration. As already discussed in another thread, the buttons have either to be removed or to extended a lot in order to work with the improved download scripts proposed on webs...@libo. So I'd suggest to start with the structure and ask for graphics when the structure and content has been decided. Best regards Bernhard (working on too many other topics to contribute to the website in a substantially way...) -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [steering-discuss] Updated draft of the Community Bylaws
Hi Charles, * Charles-H. Schulz schrieb: Hello everyone, Here is the latest version of the bylaws: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/CommunityBylaws BoD elections are not clear to me: ... the BoD gets renewed by half each year ... ... the nine candidates having won the highest number of votes are deemed to have been elected ... If all nine Directors are elected at once, how should the renewal by half each year work? In my eyes present BoD members are more likely to be re-elected for a second term (if they did a good job) as anybody else not being that prominent and well-known in the Community. If the BoD members want to go on with their work for more than two years, they have to take a sabbatical and come back one year later - provided the TDF members votes for them. What I'd like to see is a request to some of the BoD members not to candidate for a second term after the first year but to try to become re-elected the next year and stay then for two years. This would allow continuity over a longer timeframe, as it avoids the problem of all the BoD members having to resign two years after the first election. But I don't think that this thoughts (or similar ones) should be mentioned in the Bylaws. One year term with possible extension for one more year (then one year pause before re-election is allowed) is clear enough. How we achieve continuity will rather be discussed directly than implemented in the Bylaws. Another point is the position of the line about Disputes between Contributors. The content is about the BoD and the Chairperson, but it is positioned at the end of the paragraph about the Executive Director (without the in the title, while The Chairperson contains it). Confidentiality: Did you think about the preparation of a marketing strategy with a result: We're going to do this or that during the next months and will go public in half a year..? Such work can't be done if the outcome has to be published one month after the decision. What do you think about - publish results one month after the cause for confidentiality is gone. - internal review on a monthly basis if the cause is still valid. Membership: Could you replace artwork by design? This covers not only all the branding design and visual identity, but also UX and UI design: These contributors are not necessarily researchers or code contributors, but experts in areas IMHO not covered in the other criteria. Membership application: Here is the only place the Steering Committee is mentioned (as replacement of the BoD during a interim period). Why don't you state this fact already at the paragraph about the BoD? Until the first BoD election the tasks of the BoD are handled by the Steering Committee or some better wording. This would not only cover the appointment of the Membership Committee, but all other activities too. Best regards Bernhard -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org List archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/steering-discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] Request: Installation Instructions
Hi René, Rene Engelhard schrieb: On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 07:50:59AM -0600, Sonic4Spuds wrote: This is not the case, many people on debian based systems are new to linux. Linux Mint and Ubuntu both use debian as their base. These [...] are some of the best distros for new users, who usually have a fear of the terminal and typing command arguments. And their quality is bad. Even if it were - it depends on what you expect. Windows quality isn't the best either, but this doesn't mean that Windows or Ubuntu should be excluded from being a platform/distro where we invite people to test and use LibreOffice. LibreOffice is not the place to draw people to true Linux - it's about users and their needs. And if our Ubuntu users can be helped by providing a short how-to install this should definitely be considered as worth to be included in the product. Mentioning Ubuntu as an example here disqualifies you already. Please stop this kind of attitude immediately. Insulting others can't be the way to discuss *any* topic on our lists. You may have a strong opinion on Ubuntu quality, but this doesn't mean anything to your attitude against Sonic4Spuds (whatever his/her name might be). On a developer list you might expect on a certain degree of developer's background information, even if I don't think you can insist on it. But we're here on the main discuss list of LibreOffice. Our community doesn't consist of developers only, but of a great variety of different experts, supporters and people willing to help in one or another area. Everybody should try to stay friendly in his/her postings, re-read them before sending and decide to modify them (or not to send them at all) if they might attack others personally. Best regards Bernhard -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] Request: Installation Instructions
Hi Rene, all, it seems that your mail started an evolution in this thread leading to negative feelings and reproaches that should be avoided. The Steering Committee asked me and Cor Nouws to have a eye on this (and the other lists we're subscribed to) in order to keep discussions on topic and avoid misbehavior. Sorry for stepping in so late, but I'm unable to be present 24 hours a day... Rene Engelhard schrieb: Hi, On Sat, Nov 20, 2010 at 09:03:35AM -0600, Alexandro Colorado wrote: unsuspecting users to the same problem that OOo has been famous for: there is no obvious way to start to install the files. Dependencies for dpkg -i *.deb? each .deb have to be met, but nothing indicates the order with which to install them. When dealing with 52 .deb files it's like trying to do a jigsaw puzzle where all distinguishing marks have been filed off. Nope. Really, I expect anybody having root on a Debian-based system to know dpkg. Seriously. This is your personal opinion, you didn't blame anybody - nothing to say against it. But as the follow-up turned out to become more personal, I want to add my comments here (dedicated to all posters here in this thread): Your expectation is only valid for yourself - you can't tell anybody else to follow your opinion. People with different experience and opinions should never be treated as fools or idiots. In a volunteer community nobody has the right to force anybody to do something. If it might be a bug-fix, an addition to the readme, a piece of documentation, artwork or (really necessary at the moment) work on the LibreOffice website. But on the other hand nobody is allowed to exclude a contribution just because of his or her opinion, political or other interests. If there are valid reasons they have to be discussed and decided - but this should never be done by any individual. I don't know if René's position not to include additional installation instructions is shared by the majority of developers. It only shows that we should have a closer look at the Community Bylaws. The board deciding on including or excluding features and code contributions is *not* the Engineering Steering Committee [ESC]. Their task is to provide technical guidance, settle technical disputes ... The Board of Directors [BoD] - elected by all approved members of community - has to provide (among others) strategic planning, dispute settlement and community guidance, so it's their duty to find our community's way if there are oppositional interests in different groups of our community. But normally our intentions are not controversial at all: We want to improve our office suite, get more people to install and use it and find new contributor and more high quality contributions. So - to come back to the very topic here: Thanks to David [1] there will be a bug filed to include his how-to (might be based on NoOp's posting[2]) in the Linux version of LibreOffice. I don't see a reason why René would have to be the one to do this inclusion, if there is anybody else able to do so. If there are more than personal reasons not to include it, this should be mentioned in the bug report and brought back to this list for further consideration. I think here on this list is the best mixture of just users and people with profound knowledge of our product. I'd love to see some input by our UX expert(s), but this seems to me a basic political question: Do we want to make it as easy as possible to install and use our product on every supported platform? Only in case there is no common agreement on this topic the SC (being in the position of the BoD until the first election) should be involved. So please let's keep on the good work and avoid insulting each other just because we're individual people with different opinions on one or another topic. Best regards Bernhard [1]: http://go.mail-archive.com/eJqKKG7fNBgkKexh2MZnTm21RXA= [2]: http://go.mail-archive.com/a2cePZ-wvSelzyGuwyfsWvRJhSM= -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: A proposal for effective, volunteer-friendly user support in LibreOffice
Hi Robert, * Robert Derman schrieb: [...] Perhaps we should make more of an effort than OOo did of making LO available on disk as an alternative to downloads. An on disk version could include more documentation as well as many, most, or perhaps all templates and extensions. a CD provides about 700 MB of space which is really a lot, and a DVDs 4.5 gig is almost unlimited compared to the size of what we have to offer. There is already a team working on a downloadable ISO for a DVD containing not only the product, but documentation and other resources too. They started in the Germanophone OOo community as PrOOo-Box (http://www.prooo-box.org) and continue their work for LibreOffice - starting from the German version, but will work on an international level too: http://www.libreofficebox.org/ Best regards Bernhard -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] New support list suggestion
Hi Charles, * Charles Marcus schrieb: I'd really like to see an email support list dedicated solely to questions in the nature of I know how to do this in Excel/Word/Powerpoint, but how do I do it on Calc/Writer/Impress?... I'd rather like to see this in a FAQ - perhaps in a dedicated area or tagged with MSO relation. Linking to other support means (Forum, mailing list etc) should be a must for the FAQ - and new entries should be created easily (perhaps with different stages proposal / approved). Best regards Bernhard -- Unsubscribe instructions: Email to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines: http://netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived ***
[steering-discuss] Re: [steering-discuss] Community bylaws
Hi Charles, * thanks for this profound and important work! Hello all, please read the first real draft of the Community Bylaws here: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/CommunityBylaws done :-) Feel free to comment on our beloved discuss list. Do you mean this steering discuss list? Or the general disc...@documentfoundation list? Sorry if I chose the wrong one... There are just two short comments I want to post: 1st: *Number of ESC members* In Governance (http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/CommunityBylaws#Governance) it reads: Engineering Steering Committee : ... It is composed of 5 members. Two headings below (http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/CommunityBylaws#Engineering_Steering_Committee) it reads: The Engineering Steering Committee (ESC) is made of developers who are coopted (i.e, there's no need for election and there can be as many members of the ESC as needed). So what is the number of ESC members? 5 or as many as needed? 2nd: *Financial board* The bylaws refer to a financial board in the Definitions (http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/CommunityBylaws#Definitions) under Foundation: The * Document Foundation may have trustees (... all members of the *Financial*, ... and Directors' boards), as well as in the ESC paragraph (at least I understand FB as such): Duties of the ESC is to provide expertise and information to the BoD, the AB, *the FB*, the Chairman, the Executive Director and any other officer of the Foundation I don't think we should establish such a board right from the beginning, the Financial Officier should be enough - if it will be necessary it can be added later on. Best regards Bernhard -- E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org for instructions on how to unsubscribe List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/steering-discuss/ All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[tdf-discuss] Re: [tdf-discuss] priorising feature-requests [was: LO mobile phone version]
Hi Ian, * Ian Lynch wrote: [...] Establish a simple Forum called proposals. I'd prefer a sortable list at the wiki / website with columns for name, date and proposal (up to 100 char), link to description, bug entry (if already filed), number of votes, necessary resources and proirity. The two latter columns will have to be editable only by SC. People with ideas post an outline proposal to a list limited to say 1000 characters. TDF committee review the list every month say and short list priorities to gather further information. If something looks feasible and is a high priority LO officials approach the relevant parties. It occurs to me that this would provide more focus to the discuss list which often seems to do a lot of discussion without much scope for outcome. It wouldn't replace the discuss list, just provide a logical extension to give project ideas more chance of happening. But this should not replace the discussions on the list - only finalized proposals should be presented to validation / priorization. The list I mentioned might be created automatically from feature-request bugs (after revision / approval) This would keep the workflow, involve the developers and decision maker in an open and comprehensive way. Best regards Bernhard -- Unsubscribe instructions: Email to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines: http://netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] LibO program icon brainstorming
Hi Kami, all, great to have you in our team! Kálmán „KAMI” Szalai schrieb: Hi All, I do not know if there is any ongoing program icon redesign effort or the LibO will save the OpenOffice.org 3.1 styled icon. We will have to create our own icons - transporting our branding to the user's desktops. It will have to be a concerted action for marketing and UX, so I moved this mail to the marketing list. Please follow up there... I created a draft for new icons where I used the TDF emblem as base, and the color and symbols from OOo Icon. I did the same, but used the LibreOffice colors (adding an ocher yellow for Draw) and kept the OOo2.0 symbols, because I didn't have SVG versions of the 3.1 icons at hand. But it might be a starting point ... I uploaded it to the wiki: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/File:LibreOffice_icons_draft.png and added it as first item to the Branding Sandbox I just created: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/index.php?title=Marketing/Branding/Sandboxaction=submit It is nothing special, just my brainstorming idea to start discussion about this topic. SVG files are attached. As attachments are stripped off by the mail-server, please upload the files to the wiki. Best regards Bernhard -- E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org for instructions on how to unsubscribe List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [tdf-discuss] unsubscribe [was: Multilingualism...]
Hi Charles, all, Charles Marcus schrieb: On 2010-10-20 5:05 PM, Jon Hawkins wrote: This unsubscribe/confirm procedure is basically the same procedure someone used when they subscribed, If the link at the bottom of the email was an actual unsubscribe link instead of the info link, I'd agree... The info link should be second, and the unsubscribe link should be right there in the email footer. This line has been modified because there is a different way to unsubscribe from digest lists. We had a thread here complaining about digest users couldn't unsubscribe at all. Florian is already working on a solution using a webform or something like that, so please keep your mood and wait a bit longer. I know that it is unsatisfactory to see problems addressed earlier to reappear - but even if the day would have 36 hours, Florian would have not the time to solve everything during one week... Best regards Bernhard -- E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org for instructions on how to unsubscribe List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [tdf-discuss] Houston, we have a problem.
As nearly nobody can read all the mails here thoroughly, I just repeat what I read: Charles Marcus schrieb: On 2010-10-19 8:11 AM, Xi Embalsado wrote: WOW! I could never fit a size 50 to a size 2! Well at least don't go to the Microsoft Office size (600MB) Better make things in separate languages. Sorry for some big comments there... What would make more sense to me is to make one installer with maybe 3 or 4 of the most popular languages included, then allow the install process to connect to the internet to download the desired language pack if a different language is selected. Inclusion of that many language packs was necessary because of our distribution system: Even if we have quite a number of mirrors being able to allow downloads from all over the world, the space on our main server is limited. There is not enough room for all the localized versions to be uploaded. Once there will be enough space, the package will become smaller again. Best regards Bernhard -- E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org for instructions on how to unsubscribe List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [tdf-discuss] unsubscribed posters
Hi Barbara, all, Barbara Duprey schrieb: On 10/15/2010 7:11 PM, Bernhard Dippold wrote: [...] I'd like to establish a common agreement on how to deal with moderated mails, so these off-topic mails will be not necessary any more. That would be nice, and maybe we can make it work -- but this list may not be the best place to do it. How about if we (and whoever else is especially interested in all this) start communicating off list and try to generate a strawman for the rest of the group to discuss in specific, rather than generic, terms? I'm really interested in this topic, but I'm running totally out of time. It's hard to read all the mails and to reply to the most important only (in my eyes). I will probably not be able to contribute much to this thread (or to the wiki) during the next few weeks - but I promise to stay on reading it... Sorry :-( Bernhard -- E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org for instructions on how to unsubscribe List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [tdf-discuss] Basic question about Oracle asking OOo community members to leave
Hi Marco, * M. Fioretti schrieb: Hi folks, maybe this is a very stupid question or just a very naive one, but I assure you that it is in good faith. Is this decision a surprise for anybody? Me, I've been seriously asking myself since september 28, every time I saw some of the TDF founders posting around with an @openoffice.org address or signature: how can this guy still use this hat in public? Why is Oracle allowing it? As Oracle is part of the OpenOffice.org community, it should be bound to the rules established (mainly by Sun Microsystems employees) for the community: initiate votes to remove people they think not to represent the community's will. If they don't, I can't see how they want to speak for the community. Oracle is trademark holder and contributor of the main part of the code for OpenOffice.org. But if they behave as owner of the community public reaction will be even more non-ambiguous than now. Best regards Bernhard -- E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org for instructions on how to unsubscribe List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [tdf-discuss] We're on slashdot
Hi Gianluca, * Gianluca Turconi schrieb: In data 17 ottobre 2010 alle ore 14:51:39, Italo Vignoli [...] I would expect that *Team OpenOffice.org e.V.*, the recipient of donations, would have decided about who can or cannot manage its money before the approvers in charge are removed. Perhaps a look at their website gives you a glance: http://www.teamopenoffice.de/ Even if the founding members might have been replaced or additional members have come to the association, they are probably the ones to decide. And if you search these names, most of them are still in charge of Oracle. To be fair: They have been the ones developing OpenOffice.org and StarOffice from the begin. It was great to establish such an association that could manage money on behalf of the OpenOffice.org community. If there would never be a Conflict of Interest between Oracle and the community, this would be a good way to go. But now ??? Really, I'm not able to understand how these actions ca be legally supported. It's all about the definition of the OpenOffice.org community. If this community has *not* established a foundation, people supporting LibreOffice are not supporting the community. In this case the donations given to TeamOpenOffice.org are not allowed to be spent for LibreOffice and TDF. There is no information about the level of donations by Sun/Oracle, but I assume that they have been quite relevant. Look at the numbers given here: http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Community_Council/Funding_And_Budgets/Budget_2010 TeamOpenOffice.org has been a budget of 100.000 € - *if* we are a fork (or if they decide that we are a fork) it's their duty to keep their money to the OOo community. But as these decisions have not been done by the OOo community nobody there has the right to remove any of the treasurers... Best regards Bernhard -- E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org for instructions on how to unsubscribe List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [tdf-discuss] Two moderator questions
Hi James, * James Wilde schrieb: Is it possible to add an indication that a message has been passed by the moderators to the subject line, or as a secondary header in the message itself? This way those answering the OP will know that they need to add his/her personal address to the reply. Additionally, the OP will know that tthe message has come from an email address which is not registered, which can happen by accident. Even if this would be possible, the unsubscribed user will not get replies from people posting to the list only for accident or because they reply to an answer by a subscribed poster. And additionally this would be superfluous if the OP subscribed to the list (at least for the time (s)he is interested in replies). What seems to be necessary is describing the OP how a mailing list and a volunteer community works. That's what I do on the OOo lists I'm moderator (art and branding) by a direct (standardized) mail to the OP [1]. I think it is (nearly?) as important as getting more people to use LibreOffice to show them how our community works and invite them to join. Every new community member brings more new users to our product and keeps the community alive. People not interested in joining the mailing list just need to have a look at the archives - depending on their preferences on Gnome, mail-archive.com, or our own archive (once it is searchable...). Best regards Bernhard -- E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org for instructions on how to unsubscribe All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
Re: [tdf-discuss] unsubscribed posters
Hi Barbara, Barbara Duprey schrieb: [...] [Bernhard, I'm not sure you actually saw my post == it's all snipped here. But I think it's pertinent to some of your points.] I did - but as I only replied to the main point (in my eyes), I removed the other parts to increase readability. You seem to want to make it easier for unsubscribed users to get their questions replied - I want to show them more: Our community. I'm sure you're not the only one to use the list this way, but I'm pretty sure that investigation would show two main motivations: getting answers to questions, and learning about the capabilities and possible difficulties of the software (and that kind of user would almost certainly subscribe). Participation would generally come later, when people are more familiar with the software and the community. I started with the first motivation, but discovered the positive attitude on the list and sticked there - being able to reply to questions by others. I'd rather propose to state clearly on the website the different ways for getting user support: - People hesitant to subscribe to the mailing list should ask their questions on the forum. In my experience, people are much less hesitant to subscribe to a mailing list than to learn about forum use (many more people use e-mail than forums) and identify the proper forum to use for their question. So you ask them to subscribe? All of OOo (or LibO) is just it! Don't understand what you are referring to... - If users want to ask their question on the mailing list, they should subscribe IMHO and find out how our community works. The main issue here is the volume of mail on the most likely lists (users and discuss). Many of these folks are not especially (or even somewhat!) tech savvy; they just want to get an answer to a question, not wade through lots of things of no interest to them. So there are different interests by the user and the community. While the user only wants to get his question replied, the community wants to involve new members. In this case it is important to tell them about the number of mails they will be sent if they subscribe. If this is too much in their eyes, they should look at the archives / Gmane / Nabbles / www.mail-archive.com. But I think they will be able to delete 20 in their eyes unnecessary mails if they get their reply for free and in a very short timeframe. I'll bet many don't know how to set up filters so all the list mail stays separate from their regular mail, and they quite likely don't even understand threading. When they've subscribed, and gotten swamped and/or irritated, we get unsubscribe me requests/demands. With a proper information mail to unsubscribed posters they will know how to unsubscribe. The mail from the moderators to the unsubscribed posters is the most important one - it's the invitation to join our community. This mail will have to provide all necessary information on how to subscribe and unsubscribe as well as a short statement who we are. About unsubscribe requests: I'm quite sure that most of the people didn't know enough about the mailing list, when they subscribed: This should be addressed as well on the website (near to the subscribe links) as in the mail the moderators send. With the information by the moderators they will have the chance to get all the replies from the archive or subscribe and perhaps become a community member. The main problem I see with directing them to the archive is that in a large number of cases, they're asked to supply additional information so we can help, and the archive is not set up for that (at least, the OOo one isn't). I see the point - threading will only be able for replies via Nabbles and Gmane. ... or if they have subscribed ;-) I don't want the OP is not subscribed. Please CC him mails on this mailing list and the discussions about the necessity for them. I agree this is not good -- but at the moment no really satisfactory alternative has been developed. That's why these discussions keep occurring. I'd like to establish a common agreement on how to deal with moderated mails, so these off-topic mails will be not necessary any more. Who ever wants to CC him can do so, but without bothering others. It is often not clear whether or not the OP is subscribed -- many can't/won't look at the full headers or filter on them, and sometimes they join the discussion later, when the header is not available. For somebody who really has an interest in the care and feeding of currently unsubscribed users, so they can eventually be brought into the community, or at least be happy with the software, this means that the OP may well be dissatisfied. They don't get answers, and assume we don't care. This has to be addressed by the moderators of the list. They are the ones knowing that the poster is not subscribed - and they should tell him how to follow the thread (and in my eyes the
[tdf-discuss] Re: Installing single components [was: LibO Install/Update ...]
Hi Todd, all, todd rme schrieb: [... removed citation of different topic ...] There is another, somewhat independent issue that has occurred to me. So this should have been posted in a new thread ;-) What about how the components are split up? As far as I know this doesn't have any major positive effects: Most of the components share their sources, so you won't spare much disk space. But we should involve developers already at the beginning: Discussing such topics without knowledge about the benefits and necessary resources could mean to spend too much time that could be used differently. Just my 2 cent Bernhard [...] -- To unsubscribe, e-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted. List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
Re: [tdf-discuss] Technical Support via Gmane?
Hi Harold, all, Harold Fuchs schrieb: [...] PS Are we top posting? There will be flak. Generally we use inline reply (below the phrase our reply is related to) in combination with removing all the irrelevant parts of a mail. Top posting should be avoided, but in my eyes it could be considered, if the posting relates to the entire context of the previous thread or is covered in the subject already. But in any case all irrelevant stuff should be removed (normally leading to just keeping just a few lines or none at all). So main rule: Avoid full quote - remove all irrelevant stuff for your reply. Second: Write below the phrase you are referring to (if there is one). Third: No thread-hijacking. Start a new thread on every topic. Fourth: No attachments (most will not come through to the list). For Florian (and others working nearly as hard as him) I want to have an exception: If he takes the time to reply instead of working on our infrastructure and all the other stuff necessary for us to start working in our preferred area of the community, he may post wherever he want - top, bottom, in between, even below a signature (and therefore not easy to detect). Thank you Florian for your great work and dedication! (And avoid breaking down one day...) Best regards Bernhard -- To unsubscribe, e-mail to discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted. List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
Re: [tdf-discuss] List available at GMANE
Hi Larry, Larry Gusaas schrieb: On 2010/10/09 4:36 AM Florian Effenberger wrote: [...] of course we do require subscription for people who want to subscribe to mailing lists. Otherwise, we'd be the victim of spam very soon. Gmane is a newsgroup. They require verification of the the sender before they post the message. This serves the same purpose as subscribing to this list. Any senders of spam can be removed. [...] If subscription to the mailing list is required, it should be stated on the Gmane page, although there is no real need to dual subscribe and defeats the whole purpose of Gmane. For the OpenOffice.org mailing lists sending without extra subscription via Gmane became enabled just four or five years ago. I don't know about the background - perhaps someone here remembers... But please let us establish our own infrastructure first. In my opinion Gmane posting is an additional nice-to-have feature, that can be improved, when time allows it. ... especially if there is a workaround (subscribe-nomail) ... If someone is able to edit the status (to Status: posting allowed after subscription discuss+subscribe-nom...@documentfoundation.org) this would be great. Best regards Bernhard -- To unsubscribe, e-mail to discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted. List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
Re: [tdf-discuss] List available at GMANE
Hi Larry, Larry Gusaas schrieb: On 2010/10/09 10:46 AM Florian Effenberger wrote: [...] on our side, only senders who are subscribed to the list can post to it. I won't change this, as otherwise every spammer can just flood the list with emails. Florian Allowing posting from Gmane without subscription to this list will not allow spammers to flood the list. Gmane requires confirmation from sender for each list the sender posts to. Also any spammer can be reported and dealt with. Perhaps you should look at Gmane spam policy http://gmane.org/spam-control.php. Please not now - Florian's to-do-list is higher than any mountain I know of. If we are able to work with normal workload, allowing postings from Gmane would be a topic. As it was possible at OpenOffice.org, I'm quite sure it would be possible for our lists too. But please let's pend this topic for some more weeks - it is *not* the most important thing Florian has to do now. When our wiki is set up, we should create a list with topics like this, so it is not forgotten, but can be handled later on. Best regards Bernhard -- To unsubscribe, e-mail to discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted. List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
Re: [tdf-discuss] Unsubscribe NOT working!!!
Friedrich Strohmaier schrieb: Hi Volker, *, Volker Heggemann schrieb: Hi Florian, same problem at my side. I couldn't get out of the digest list?! I don't know why? what was the link used for unsubscribing digest uses a link different from the one in the footer of each mail. Send a mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org to get more info. or just tell the people interested in this topic, that you have to add the special way of subscription to the unsubscribe link: discuss+unsubscribe-dig...@documentfoundation.org discuss+unsubscribe-nom...@documentfoundation.org Best regards Bernhard -- To unsubscribe, e-mail to discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted. List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
Re: [tdf-discuss] SOLVED: Unsubscribe link broken
Hi Goran, all, Goran Rakic schrieb: [...] As this can confuse other people, and we should try to make unsubscribe for people as easy as possible to avoid angry emails, can we just drop some words to make it fit in a single line: To unsubscribe, e-mail to discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org Thanks to your proposal and Florian's tireless work everywhere at the same time this problem should be solved. Please have a look at the footer of the mail. Best regards Bernhard -- To unsubscribe, e-mail to discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted. List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
[tdf-discuss] Re: [WEB] interim mailing list structuring - a proposal
Hi Caio, all Caio wrote: Bernhard Dippold, 01-10-2010 18:20: Hi all, we'll have to wait some more days until the structure of our community here will be able to handle the amount of topics and ideas in a more appropriate way with new mailing lists, a wiki and other means to divide different interests on several groups. Until then I propose to add some tags to the subject of your mails in order to identify them more easily (and to filter them in your mail client). [...] [DEVELOPERS] discussions/proposals about *coding* and building +1 Even if I read some mails here pointing to a different mailing list: libreoff...@lists.freedesktop.org As this list will be the starting point for most new contributors at the moment, we should add this tag. IMHO I don't think we need a list for the sole purpose of discussing the mailing list structure. That could be website or general. I thought about the wished for addtional native-lang mailing lists. But they can categorized under [N-L] Another point I didn' t mention before: Please start a new thread with any new topic and add a short description to the subject. And I'd like to shorten the tag names in order to reduce the length of the subjects. Documentation - [DOC] Native-Lang -[N-L] Developers- [DEV] website -[WEB] others should stay: Bugs -[BUGS] new features -[FEATURES] localization -[L10N] marketing -[MARKETING] other topics -[GENERAL] Best regards Bernhard PS: Add other important tags to this list please... -- To unsubscribe, send an empty e-mail to discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted. List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
[tdf-discuss] [GENERAL] New name
Hi Mirek, all, Mirek Mazel wrote: Hi everyone, I'm really excited about the project, but I'm a bit concerned about the name. What concerns me is that one can't tell how to pronounce the name. Some pronounce it librehoffice, some (including me) leeberoffice, some may even pronounce it as libberoffice. I don't think that pronouncation is such an important topic. You may say kouka-koula or koka-kola or anything else, mostly depending on your mother language. We can advise people intested in right pronounciation about the way we use it (by the way, I pronounce libre just like in French, as I learned some French in school), but people will read and pronounce it in the way they are used to. It's not as hard to pronounce as OpenOffice.org I'd really like to take this opportunity (as LibreOffice is not yet widely known) to really get the name right -- I mean, for most software, this opportunity tends to come only once. I know that the domain name has been already bought, sure, but it's vital for software to have a good name. [...] Another thing that always bothered me with the OpenOffice.org trademark and now applies to the LibreOffice trademark too, is that, when you first hear about it, it sounds like an Office knock-off (in the same way that Adidos sounds like a cheap copy of Adidas), [...] Firefox and Chrome didn't need to use the word Internet within their names to be successful, and neither do office suites need to use the word Office in their names. Naming is really important - nobody will deny this. Large companies spend millions of dollars on researching for the right name and promoting it. We can't - at least at the moment ;-) Our name should tell people about the content, as this is marketing without additional costs. I don't have a problem with Office. One more point is about a bit of consitency with OpenOffice.org. I personally correlate libre with open, so it's not so hard to see the connection. What do you think? Should we brainstorm names and vote on the best one, or is it too late or too complicated to change the name now? It is complicated, but not impossible to change the name. But any name should not be occupied by anything else (product name, website etc). It should transport the goals of our community and product at the first sight (or at least at the second). And even if some names could be found out, being able to convince marketing and UX experts, language independent and pronouncable in any language, there stays a major problem: At the time we'll decide about the name, websites will be registered by others, trademarks filed and so on. Even if I mislike closed door decisions, this is probably not a topic to be discussed on an open list. And I like the name! Best regards Bernhard -- To unsubscribe, send an empty e-mail to discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted. List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
[tdf-discuss] Re: The Document Foundation Planet is now live
Florian wrote: Hi, as of today, The Document Foundation Planet is now live: http://planet.documentfoundation.org please have a look there: the header and the date overlap in IE (probably IE7 can't find out here at work). Best regards Bernhard -- To unsubscribe, send an empty e-mail to discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted. List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
[tdf-discuss] Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: The Document Foundation Planet is now live
.png attachment stripped off... As I can't upload the image here at work, CC'ing Florian and Guy. Bernhard - Original Message - From: bernh...@familie-dippold.at To: discuss@documentfoundation.org Date: 02.10.2010 13:34:21 Subject: [tdf-discuss] Re: The Document Foundation Planet is now live Florian wrote: Hi, as of today, The Document Foundation Planet is now live: http://planet.documentfoundation.org please have a look there: the header and the date overlap in IE (probably IE7 can't find out here at work). Best regards Bernhard -- To unsubscribe, send an empty e-mail to discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted. List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ -- To unsubscribe, send an empty e-mail to discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted. List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
[tdf-discuss] Re: [tdf-discuss] [WEB] interim structuring - a proposal
Hi Cor, Hi Bernard, *, Bernhard Dippold wrote (01-10-10 23:20) [BUGS] discussions/proposals about *bugs* in LibreOffice [FEATURES] discussions/proposals about new *features* for LibreOffice Both are strongly development related. Core development has found its place on FreeDesktop. http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/libreoffice/ Maybe it is enough to have Bugs/Features on one list, DEV@ ? This would be the place where people discuss features, bugs, proposals. I wanted to provide a possibility to report bugs and talk about possible features for non-developers. There are some threads about bugs here on the list, and as long as there is no bugzilla enabled with an easy frontend, I think we'll see more of them here. Also I think QA@ is a good thing. +1 [L10N] for discussions/proposals about *localization* of the product [WEBSITE] for discussions/proposals about the *website*, forums, wiki, IRC etc [WEB] [MAILING LIST] for discussions/proposals about the *mailing lists* structures Why not discuss@ ? I'd support the suggestion about [WEB] [NATIVE-LANG] discussions/proposals about *native-language* structures [N-L] [DOCUMENTATION] discussions/proposals about the *documentation* of LibreOffice [DOC] [MARKETING] discussions/proposals about *marketing* for The Document Foundation and LibreOffice [MKT]? [GENERAL] discussions/proposals about *everything else* Why not discuss@ ? just to avoid double naming ;-) When other threads move to different mailing lists, they will not need any tags any more... Best regards Bernhard -- To unsubscribe, send an empty e-mail to discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted. List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
Re: [tdf-discuss] Explanation . . . ?
Hi Kürti, all, Kürti László schrieb: Hi, I had some short chat with Oracle representatives they are stating official ly: Oracle is investing substantial resources in OpenOffice.org. With more than one hundred million users, we believe OpenOffice.org is the most advanced, most feature rich open source implementation and will strongly encourage the Open Office community to continue to contribute through www.openoffice.org. However, the beauty of open source is that it can be forked by anyone who chooses, as was done today. Our sincerest goal for Open Office is that it become more widely used so if this new foundation will help advance Open Office and the Open Document Format we wish them the best. In my opinion it means (at this very moment) that there will be OpenOffice. org and LibreOffice as well. Not necessarily: They state: Oracle is investing substantials resources in OpenOffice.org I don't know if they mean the product (developers) or the community (infrastructure) in this point, but both is true and has ever been appreciated by the volunteer part of our community. But further down the line they talk about Open Office instead of OpenOffice.org. If they did this on purpose (and I have to assume, that the official statement doesn't include such mistakes), so it has to be interpreted as referring to Oracle Open Office instead of OpenOffice.org. So what is the Open Office Community? Reading the statement again, this might mean that the OpenOffice.org Community should ... encourage the Open Office Community (sic!) to continue to contribute through www.openoffice.org. I always worked on improving and furthering OpenOffice.org - not for a company's but for our community's sake. I am not part of the Open Office Community, but of the OpenOffice.org Community. Even if I still hope for the trademark to be given back to us, this message is at least a sign in a dedicated direction. :-( I don't think it is a problem, why not, if Oracle wants keep OO.o both coul d developed. We will see if there is real contribution or not. They will develop Oracle Open Office - about OpenOffice.org's future there is nothing written in this statement. And anyway the OOo name and rights owned by Oracle so we could do nothing. We will not wait very long - too much to do and to decide. Best regards Bernhard -- To unsubscribe, send an empty e-mail to discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted. List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
Re: [tdf-discuss][FAQ:] collecting more FAQ [was: Mailist and usenet discussion list]
Hi Charles, all, thanks for your proposal! Charles Marcus schrieb: On 2010-09-29 10:26 AM, Marc Paré wrote: Either that, or start a forums board where the threads are clearly laid out. Many people who will join the ML will not have any idea what discussions have taken place and you will find yourselves constantly repeating past announcement over and over again. It would make the experience of joining the Document Foundation - LibreOffice movement a lot less frustrating for both the users and core group. Or just start an FAQ... There is already a FAQ with a few questions we thought to be important at the start. http://www.documentfoundation.org/faq/ Of course this is just a very short collection - but it's just a start. We could start to collect more items here on the list until we have the wiki. Best regards Bernhard -- To unsubscribe, send an empty e-mail to discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted. List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
