2012/1/12 Jürgen Schmidt <jogischm...@googlemail.com>: > Hi, > > I have some stuff that I would like to discuss before we release a 3.4 and > to move forward with related changes > > 1. Copyright statements > We have several places where we define variables containing copyright > statements. Most often they are set to > > copyright = "1999-2010 by Oracle" or similar or > copyright = "1999-2009 by OpenOffice.org" > > Do we want or have to change this to something like "2011 Apache Software > Foundation"? > > 2. Vendor > We have also several places where we define the vendor to "Oracle" or > "OpenOffice.org" > > I would change this to "Apache Software Foundation" > > The vendor can be changed also by the configure swtich --with-vendor >
For the above two, I think it depends on how the user sees these values displayed in the product. What is the context? I think we can change the "vendor" value to ASF freely. For the copyright, we need more care. Oracle still owns the copyright. We have a license granted from them (ALv2), but they still own the copyright on their original work. The normal practice would be to relocate the copyright notice, with theoir permission, to the NOTICE file and then put ASF copyright for the aggregate product. But we should work that through with Andrew Rist. A claim of a copyright by OpenOffice.org is puzzling, since there is no legal entity called "OpenOffice.org". It would be good to know the context in which this is shown to the user. > 3. Values in minor.mk > The main/solenv/inc/minor.mk contains several values that have influence on > several places. > > For example the name of the download files, the content of the About dialog, > etc. > > The value are current: > RSCVERSION=340 > RSCREVISION=340m1(Build:9584) > BUILD=9584 > LAST_MINOR=m1 > SOURCEVERSION=OOO340 > > I think we should define new values and the question is how we want to use > this values. > > I would propose the following for the short term: > > RSCVERSION=340 -> we keep this for now because are working on an AOO 3.4 and > we will change it when we work on 4.0 or 3.4.1 accordingly > > RSCREVISION=340m1(Build:9584) -> here i am not sure how we should handle > this. We have currently no similar build process that we had in the past. I > would propose a value like "340 (Rev.: r1230461)" where we change the > revision number dynamically. > > BUILD -> don't have a good idea yet > LAST_MINOR -> the same, I haven't a good idea yet. > > More analysis is necessary to understand where this is used and if we still > need it. > > SOURCEVERSION=AOO340 -> here I would simply change the first "O" to "A" to > make clear that we work on the AOO sources > > Any comments or ideas? > > Juergen > >
