On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 04:51:11PM -0600, Adolfo Jayme Barrientos wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 2:24 PM, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> > Becaudse *you* don't care about what "Open Source" is doesn't mean that all
> > the
> > people who care should do stuff to clean it up.
>
> Hello, Rene Engelhard.
On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 10:44 PM, Adolfo Jayme Barrientos
wrote:
>> "If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck,
>> then it probably is a duck."
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duck_test
>
> Oh well, I will not try to convince you, you seem to believe this is
> marketing.
> "If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck,
> then it probably is a duck."
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duck_test
Oh well, I will not try to convince you, you seem to believe this is
marketing. I’m not the appropriate person to keep arguing, because: 1)
I’m a typograph
On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 6:42 PM, Adolfo Jayme Barrientos
wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 5:41 PM, Norbert Thiebaud wrote:
>> If the name was so inconsequential, why did the author choose a
>> license that forbid _changing_ the name ?
>>
>> It is one thing to get distros to cooperate together one
On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 5:41 PM, Norbert Thiebaud wrote:
> If the name was so inconsequential, why did the author choose a
> license that forbid _changing_ the name ?
>
> It is one thing to get distros to cooperate together one large project
> like libreoffice, it is quite another to purposefully
On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 4:51 PM, Adolfo Jayme Barrientos
wrote:
> Now, going on-topic: the UFL does not forbid LibreOffice from
> including Ubuntu [1], we are not renaming it, and honestly, calling it
> “distro-specific” based on just the name, is throwing bullshit. There
> is a cola beverage name
On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 2:24 PM, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> Becaudse *you* don't care about what "Open Source" is doesn't mean that all
> the
> people who care should do stuff to clean it up.
Hello, Rene Engelhard. It is the first time you and I talk to each
other, and we had never met face-to-face
On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 10:56:29AM -0600, Adolfo Jayme Barrientos wrote:
> logic to the other “non-free” fonts added to LibreOffice, such as Open
> Sans, Source {Code|Sans} Pro and PT Serif. But instead of removing
This shows that you don't know what you're talking about, too:
- I assume with PT
Hi,
On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 09:15:22PM +0100, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> > these from shipping in LibreOffice, Debian packaging should be the
> > place where these fonts are removed. Because its *Debian policy* which
And sorry, that is wrong. the DFSG is (mostly) deintical with the Open Source
Defin
On 24/01/13 21:15, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 10:56:29AM -0600, Adolfo Jayme Barrientos wrote:
>> On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 4:57 AM, Rene Engelhard wrote:
>>> Yeah, For that reason it's /supposed to be in) non-free in Debian, see
>>> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi
Hi,
On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 09:15:22PM +0100, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> > > We shouldn't include non-free stuff here.
> >
> > Yeah, it’s considered “non-free” by Debian, but we can apply the same
> > logic to the other “non-free” fonts added to LibreOffice, such as Open
> > Sans, Source {Code|Sans}
On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 10:56:29AM -0600, Adolfo Jayme Barrientos wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 4:57 AM, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> > I don't. Distro specific font... They can ship it if they want.
>
> What does it mean “distro-specific”?
"Ubuntu fonts". If it wasn't distro-specific it wouldn't
On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 11:02 AM, Stefan Knorr (Astron)
wrote:
> Note that I only spoke about the user-defined background images
> feature. Not about the Personas feature. These are two separate (but
> mutually exclusive, IIUC) features.
>
> Astron.
Sorry, I misread!
--
Adolfo
_
On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 11:07 AM, Stefan Knorr (Astron)
wrote:
> Can you clarify why you think these fonts are not free? Afaik, they
> are under the fairly standard, free AL2, or OFL, respectively. The
> Ubuntu font otoh uses its own license that unfortunately adds
> restrictions on when you can r
Hi Astron,
I don't know what you mean with that, that it's not visible enough. I'm
using Ubuntu and here it looks like every other tooltip: a black box
with white text. That's visible enough for me.
Samuel
Am 24.01.2013 16:40, schrieb Stefan Knorr (Astron):
Hi Samuel,
while in general, I l
Hi Adolfo,
On 24 January 2013 17:56, Adolfo Jayme Barrientos wrote:
> Yeah, it’s considered “non-free” by Debian, but we can apply the same
> logic to the other “non-free” fonts added to LibreOffice, such as Open
> Sans, Source {Code|Sans} Pro and PT Serif.
Can you clarify why you think these fo
Hi Adolfo,
> But still, it’s too late to remove things. Too much hype this feature
> has created on blogs already... And people is still yelling that “we
> do not care about UI” or something like that...
Note that I only spoke about the user-defined background images
feature. Not about the Person
On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 10:55 AM, Stefan Knorr (Astron)
wrote:
> You realise the 4.0.0 RC3 aka the 4.0.0 final release is going to be
> tagged beginning of next week and strings have been frozen for some
> time? Also, Kendy is on holiday until Monday.
But still, it’s too late to remove things. To
On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 4:57 AM, Rene Engelhard wrote:
> I don't. Distro specific font... They can ship it if they want.
What does it mean “distro-specific”?
> Yeah, For that reason it's /supposed to be in) non-free in Debian, see
> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=603157.
>
> We
Hi Fitoschido,
On 24 January 2013 17:50, Adolfo Jayme Barrientos wrote:
> No, I don’t agree on removing the feature from 4.0. We should improve
> its rough edges instead of going the easy way.
You realise the 4.0.0 RC3 aka the 4.0.0 final release is going to be
tagged beginning of next week and
No, I don’t agree on removing the feature from 4.0. We should improve
its rough edges instead of going the easy way.
On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 10:28 AM, Stefan Knorr (Astron)
wrote:
> Hi Michel, Kendy,
>
> * sorry this comes so late... *
>
> tldr: The background image UI should really go if it won'
Hi Michel, Kendy,
* sorry this comes so late... *
tldr: The background image UI should really go if it won't work.
On 18 January 2013 10:03, Jan Holesovsky wrote:
>> May i make some suggestions on the pref panel ?
>> - why not keep the "own image" to select an image in local hd ?
Hm ... well,
Sent to Samuel only.
-- Forwarded message --
From: Stefan Knorr (Astron)
Date: 24 January 2013 16:40
Subject: Re: [Libreoffice-ux-advise] Word completion default value
To: Samuel Mehrbrodt
Hi Samuel,
while in general, I like this behaviour a lot better than the default,
I gue
Hi,
On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 11:13:43AM +0100, Stefan Knorr (Astron) wrote:
> On 24 January 2013 10:27, Tor Lillqvist wrote:
> >> with LibreOffice on Windows and OSX? That would make them available for
> >> use in
> >> default templates etc.
And why should that be needed?
> Personally, I'd love
Hi Tor,
On 24 January 2013 10:27, Tor Lillqvist wrote:
> If the Ubuntu typeface is so unique as they say (i.e. instantly
> recognisable) (or even worse, subconsciously recognised), wouldn't
> using it in templates then be an endorsement of Ubuntu? Isn't
> LibreOffice supposed to be vendor-neutral
Hi Björn, Tor,
On 24 January 2013 10:27, Tor Lillqvist wrote:
>> with LibreOffice on Windows and OSX? That would make them available for use
>> in
>> default templates etc.
Personally, I'd love to see it in LibreOffice, especially because it
is one of the very few opensource fonts that covers s
26 matches
Mail list logo
