Hi Bjoern,
2012/5/20 Bjoern Michaelsen <bjoern.michaelsen@canonical.com>
Hi all,
On Sun, Apr 01, 2012 at 03:44:09PM +0200, Alexander Wilms wrote:
here's the Wiki page:
https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Ubuntu_Templates
I assume the development has moved elsewhere in the meantime?
Kind of. There's a call for CC0/public domain templates going on right now
at https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Design/Call_for_Templates . The CC0
license has been chosen to allow for any use of the templates (without the
presenter having to mention the author's name or being restricted by
copyleft or into using the templates with only our software).
Anyway, upstream feature freeze for 3.6 is closing (2012-06-04) in:
http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/ReleasePlan#3.6_release
so I would like to have integrated whatever we have right now and replace
the
old default masterpages with them, because frankly: they are _really_
ugly. I
am talking about these:
http://opengrok.libreoffice.org/xref/core/extras/source/templates/layout/
I agree.
@Alexander Wilms: The typography templates at
http://templates.libreoffice.org/template-center/typography look
beautiful and
I would like to make them a replacement for the biggest and most ugly of
the
current templates, which are:
1.1M May 19 21:57 extras/source/templates/layout/lyt-book.otp
706K May 19 21:57 extras/source/templates/layout/lyt-forest.otp
690K May 19 21:57 extras/source/templates/layout/lyt-paper.otp
639K May 19 21:57 extras/source/templates/layout/lyt-glacier.otp
638K May 19 21:57 extras/source/templates/layout/lyt-wine.otp
which in all their ugliness do not justify the space they eat in the
default
install. Any objections to that?
Do we have any more masterpages we could use to replace the ones above? As
frankly, the current ones are _really_ ugly -- so even if want you have is
not
perfect, it is likely better than what we would ship with now (after
replacing
the above 5 templates there would still be 25 of the old ones left).
Take a look at the wiki page mentioned above:
https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Design/Call_for_Templates#Submissions
These should all be licensed under CC0.
The "vintage", "fresh and serious", "Rounded Rectagles" and "Hexagons"
templates do not look too bad too me. Does anybody know the authors and can
ping them if it is ok to directly include their work under MPL/LGPLv3+?
I believe most of that (except "Rounded Rectangles") is Alex's work, too.
Best,
Bjoern
P.S.: At UDS we talked about moving "our" templates to an universe package.
Back then I was talking about these templates:
http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=pkg-openoffice/libreoffice.git;a=tree;f=ubuntu;h=4d6fb808aed6d29944bc4980aae9ce3401e85ec1;hb=refs/heads/ubuntu-oneiric-3.4
however, given how ugly and big these upstream masterpages are:
506K May 19 21:57 extras/source/templates/layout/lyt-keyboard.otp
496K May 19 21:57 extras/source/templates/layout/lyt-water.otp
491K May 19 21:57 extras/source/templates/layout/lyt-rededges.otp
321K May 19 21:57 extras/source/templates/layout/lyt-numdark.otp
306K May 19 21:57 extras/source/templates/layout/lyt-techpoly.otp
286K May 19 21:57 extras/source/templates/layout/lyt-bluegrey.otp
we could replace those 6 upstream with the ones from Ubuntu (excluding the
explicitly Ubuntu-branded one), which are not exactly beautiful, but better
that the defaults upstream. With that we would have 11 new masterpages
upstream
(leaving us with 25-11=14 old ones we would still need to replace).
Opinions?
I'm all for it, though we would need to convince the authors to release
these under CC0.
Context
Privacy Policy |
Impressum (Legal Info) |
Copyright information: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images
on this website are licensed under the
Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License.
This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is
licensed under the Mozilla Public License (
MPLv2).
"LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are
registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are
in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective
logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use
thereof is explained in our
trademark policy.