Date: prev next · Thread: first prev next last
2011 Archives by date, by thread · List index

Hello everyone, 

Le Tue, 01 Feb 2011 13:04:53 -0500,
drew <> a écrit :

On Tue, 2011-02-01 at 02:29 +0100, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
On 31/01/2011 drew wrote:
On Mon, 2011-01-31 at 07:56 +0100, Stefan Weigel wrote:
For me, there is absolutely nothing against presenting support
for LibreOffice at sites that use branding.

I'd say I agree with Stefan's opinion here; but in general my point
would be that the rebranding will mean a significantly reduced
visibility in search engines (since all links will point to the old
site), with the effect of hiding the work of volunteers over years;
so while a rebranding could make sense in theory, I see some
practical problems with it (problems that did not apply for
instance to OOoAuthors: there the rebranding is welcome and does
not damage users).

I can tell you with absolute certainty that some of the people
responsible for the decision to support Libo on OO.o project
specific sties are doing so out of the same feeling of
inclusiveness they applied when supporting Go-OO and NeoOffice.
Further that during the discussion to do so there was at no time
an agreement in any way that Libo = OO.o

Yes Drew, and this is the cooperation spirit I see on the Italian
forum now; everyone gives support to everyone for the common parts,
and specificities are covered correctly and peacefully.

but there was and is the acceptance that the time will come when
the two products are not close enough to be supported on a single

This seems a rather forward-looking statement. When the time comes
that the shared codebase is really tiny I'll agree on this, but I
don't see it happening reasonably early (say, in 2011). Splitting a
community that is not split (i.e., making two sites out of one)
would likely need to be justified by a real difference in code.


Hola  Andrea

Well, I was not speaking of re-branding anything my desire was for
this project to embrace the idea that it is something new and
separate. I will acknowledge that this seems not to be the view of
the majority within the current contributors and speak of it no more.

Best wishes,


I think I and others could elaborate why we agree or disagree with
respect to the legacy of OOo inside TDF and LibO. But whether one
shares the opinion that LibO is the future of OOo or its replacement
(which is my opinion) or whether one shares the opinion that it is a
new thing, in the end this project is going to bear the legacy of the
OOo project and integrate new elements and new beginnings. 

I think what is perhaps necessary for everyone is that -legacy
questions set aside- users convenience is required to think about user
forums. The real question in some time (6 months to one year) will be:
does it make sense to have an URL? Are the users
confused? how about a clearer branding? etc, etc. 

I would therefore suggest to have a pragmatic approach that also
integrates the notion that there is a legacy anyway, knowing it should
not hinder anyone for bad reasons, fear, etc.


Charles-H. Schulz
Membre du Comité exécutif
The Document Foundation.

Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to
List archive:
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***


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.