On 3/7/2014 6:22 AM, Rob Weir wrote:
Evidently we're already released, on some websites at least:
http://linux.softpedia.com/get/Office/Office-Suites/Apache-OpenOffice-253.shtml
Also, what of the "Editor's review"?
"It is derived from the IBM Lotus Symphony suite of applications..."
- not correct
"Under the hood, Apache OpenOffice is translated in over 170
languages..." - not correct
"It is also very important to mention here that the well known
LibreOffice open source office suite is based on the source code of
this application." - hmmm - correct, but, not the traditional LO
formulation
"Ever since the Oracle Corporation acquired the Sun Microsystems
company, work on Apache OpenOffice ceased, and various developers
who worked on the project decided to create a new project, named
LibreOffice." - neither correct nor pertinent
"Because of this, LibreOffice is now the main choice for any Linux
distribution developer who wants to pre-install a complete and open
source office suite application in their operating system(s)."
How much do we care about this? The risk, I suppose, is on
Softpedia, that we could find a last-minute defect in the NOTICE or
other legal files, and they find themselves distributing a package
that is not correct. But the practical risk there is small.
The greater risk is to users, that we find a last-minute fatal bug
that causes us to cancel the vote, but there are versions of the
Release Candidate still floating around. That can hurt the AOO
reputation if that happened.
I'm not sure we can prevent this from happening, and still have an
open and transparent voting process. But maybe there is something we
can do to discourage it?
-Rob
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
--
Andrew Rist | Interoperability Architect
OracleCorporate Architecture Group
Redwood Shores, CA | 650.506.9847
