On 1/12/12 12:54 PM, Rob Weir wrote:
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?
yes, I agree, a prominent place is for example the About dialog
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.
agree
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.
I assume it is used the packages on Linunx/Solaris. We still have the 3
layer office (which we should drop later) where we have the ure, base
and brand layer.
Package files related the ure and the base layer would have
OpenOffice.org copyright and files for the brand layer "Oracle".
Juergen
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
