[Libreoffice-ux-advise] [Bug 104052] Add LibreColour HLC palette

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=104052

--- Comment #17 from Rene Engelhard  ---
> First of all, a colour palette is not code, it's content, so the Open Source
> defifinition doesn't apply here.

It's bits and bytes thus it's software thus it has to fullfill the DFSG (read:
OSD). That is Debians position. Stuff like this is non-free and would be needed
to remove. a nuisance, so I am and will continue fighting against inclusion of
this as long as it's non-free.

> Third, this is not a "random" palette. It's a colour collection that has been 
> > created with a lot of research and testing behind it.

It is. It is a palette done by some people (with or without research is not
relevant here) provided by some company. Not a Standard. You started this, not
me...

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Libreoffice-ux-advise mailing list
Libreoffice-ux-advise@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-ux-advise

[Libreoffice-ux-advise] [Bug 104008] Extension removed from document title in print

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=104008

jan iversen  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||libreoffice-ux-advise@lists
   ||.freedesktop.org

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Libreoffice-ux-advise mailing list
Libreoffice-ux-advise@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-ux-advise

[Libreoffice-ux-advise] [Bug 80196] standardize color palette using mathematically generated colors

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=80196

--- Comment #44 from V Stuart Foote  ---
The column based color chart based on Wade's original ODG, attachment 101316,
is up for review...

https://gerrit.libreoffice.org/#/c/31061/

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Libreoffice-ux-advise mailing list
Libreoffice-ux-advise@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-ux-advise

[Libreoffice-ux-advise] [Bug 80196] standardize color palette using mathematically generated colors

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=80196

--- Comment #43 from V Stuart Foote  ---
(In reply to Heiko Tietze from comment #42)
> Created attachment 128930 [details]
> tonal_col
> 
> (In reply to V Stuart Foote from comment #41)
> > 
> > But completely looses the beauty/utility of the palette--white at top for
> > out of gamut colors is _functional_, not decorative!
> 
> Functional because you have the choice between 20 white? Here is what I mean.

No, functional because the position of the blanks has symbolic meaning to the
color table they represent. 

Fortunately the new Area fill dialog shows the whole palette. But the 12x7 (or
12x8 as yours shows) of the swatch picker crops the color table. 

With your suggested inverted layout, after the gray scale in the 1st row--the
2nd and 3rd rows of 10% and 20% values are not of much use. It positions the
30% values in the 4th row, while cutting off view of the more useful 73% and
82% level Magenta, Cyan and Yellow. They are less significant/useful colors so
invert and position 10% and 20% to the bottom where it does not matter if they
are not always visible. The blanks in the upper rows have relative meaning.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Libreoffice-ux-advise mailing list
Libreoffice-ux-advise@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-ux-advise

[Libreoffice-ux-advise] [Bug 80196] standardize color palette using mathematically generated colors

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=80196

--- Comment #42 from Heiko Tietze  ---
Created attachment 128930
  --> https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/attachment.cgi?id=128930=edit
tonal_col

(In reply to V Stuart Foote from comment #41)
> 
> But completely looses the beauty/utility of the palette--white at top for
> out of gamut colors is _functional_, not decorative!

Functional because you have the choice between 20 white? Here is what I mean.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Libreoffice-ux-advise mailing list
Libreoffice-ux-advise@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-ux-advise

[Libreoffice-ux-advise] [Bug 80196] standardize color palette using mathematically generated colors

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=80196

--- Comment #41 from V Stuart Foote  ---
(In reply to Heiko Tietze from comment #40)
> Putting whitespace in the top rows makes reduces the usable space. Inverting
> the palette and starting with dark colors at top provides more space to
> usable colors.

But completely looses the beauty/utility of the palette--white at top for out
of gamut colors is _functional_, not decorative!

This full palette is visible in the swatch picker and quite functional--reverse
the colors and it becomes a mess.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Libreoffice-ux-advise mailing list
Libreoffice-ux-advise@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-ux-advise

[Libreoffice-ux-advise] [Bug 80196] standardize color palette using mathematically generated colors

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=80196

--- Comment #40 from Heiko Tietze  ---
(In reply to V Stuart Foote from comment #38)
> No, the whitespace here is actually appropriate for the blank swatches...

Putting whitespace in the top rows makes reduces the usable space. Inverting
the palette and starting with dark colors at top provides more space to usable
colors.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Libreoffice-ux-advise mailing list
Libreoffice-ux-advise@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-ux-advise

[Libreoffice-ux-advise] [Bug 99027] [FORMATTING] Default table border width is useless

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=99027

Roeland  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Blocks||59284


Referenced Bugs:

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=59284
[Bug 59284] [META] Cell border related issues (Make it easier to apply borders
to cells)
-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Libreoffice-ux-advise mailing list
Libreoffice-ux-advise@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-ux-advise

[Libreoffice-ux-advise] [Bug 80196] standardize color palette using mathematically generated colors

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=80196

--- Comment #39 from V Stuart Foote  ---
Created attachment 128928
  --> https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/attachment.cgi?id=128928=edit
Wade's original color table normalized by graytone

With a 12 column layout we lose the gray scale <--> color hue equivalancy--but
note the 0% colors are all the same and the 91% and 100% values are saturated
out of the sRGB gamut.  Color swatches for those three rows can be omitted for
use in the UI.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Libreoffice-ux-advise mailing list
Libreoffice-ux-advise@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-ux-advise

[Libreoffice-ux-advise] [Bug 80196] standardize color palette using mathematically generated colors

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=80196

--- Comment #38 from V Stuart Foote  ---
(In reply to Heiko Tietze from comment #37)
> ...
> Looks very similar to me, both are really nice. If we go with the column
> variant I suggest to invert and start with dark colors in order to have less
> (literally) whitespace by default.

No, the whitespace here is actually appropriate for the blank swatches--it
represents an sRGB color that would be saturated and clipped as out of gamut
for the color space. I've just assigned a default #FE to each place holder.

Also, while the Hue by row presentation includes the 0% and the 91% values (all
black) with the columnar layout I've removed them.

The only loss is a visual ability to equate gray scale to a Percentage value
for a color hue--where the gray scale 0 - 100% aligned over each of the hues. 
A reasonable trade off to have a clean UI with our limited swatch picker.

If the swatch picker could be to enhanced to read a layout value (count of grid
columns) from the SOC file and expand to 13 columns--the gray scale could be
included as a column.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Libreoffice-ux-advise mailing list
Libreoffice-ux-advise@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-ux-advise

[Libreoffice-ux-advise] [Bug 80196] standardize color palette using mathematically generated colors

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=80196

--- Comment #37 from Heiko Tietze  ---
Created attachment 128927
  --> https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/attachment.cgi?id=128927=edit
tonal_row

(In reply to V Stuart Foote from comment #35)
> I think this is going to be more visually appealing UI...

Looks very similar to me, both are really nice. If we go with the column
variant I suggest to invert and start with dark colors in order to have less
(literally) whitespace by default.

Adding a screenshot of the tonal palette in rows for the lazy ones.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Libreoffice-ux-advise mailing list
Libreoffice-ux-advise@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-ux-advise

[Libreoffice-ux-advise] [Bug 80196] standardize color palette using mathematically generated colors

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=80196

--- Comment #36 from V Stuart Foote  ---
Created attachment 128926
  --> https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/attachment.cgi?id=128926=edit
clip of suggested tonal_column.soc in the Swatch picker

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Libreoffice-ux-advise mailing list
Libreoffice-ux-advise@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-ux-advise

[Libreoffice-ux-advise] [Bug 80196] standardize color palette using mathematically generated colors

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=80196

--- Comment #35 from V Stuart Foote  ---
Created attachment 128925
  --> https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/attachment.cgi?id=128925=edit
layout in columns for better UX in swatch picker

@Wade, Owen, *

Here is a reworked layout of the palette as .SOC, just copy it into the
$ORIGIN/share/palette directory to test. 

I've reordered this back into a columnar layout, with the gray scale as the top
row and then picking up the colors in columns.  I've inserted blanks to hold
the layout to fit our default 12 column swatch picker.

I think this is going to be more visually appealing UI for folks to pick colors
while maintaining Wade's technical goal.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Libreoffice-ux-advise mailing list
Libreoffice-ux-advise@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-ux-advise

[Libreoffice-ux-advise] [Bug 104052] Add LibreColour HLC palette

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=104052

--- Comment #16 from Christoph Schäfer  ---
(In reply to Rene Engelhard from comment #14)
> > What's the problem with this licence? We (freeColour) discussed the 
> > licensing > options with an IP lawyer
> 
> that is probably the problem.
> 
> > and came to the conclusion that, to guarantee the > same outcome on all
> > platforms and the reliability of the physical colour reference in connection
> > with any programme, the ND option is the best.
> 
> Your opinion. But it violates the open source Defnition. Remember you are
> contributing to a open source project (or well, Heiko did).
> 
> https://opensource.org/osd-annotated
> 
> So it's not something we should ship. 
> 
> > I've had this discussion in other contexts already, and the major concern 
> > was > that using any of the colours in a document creates  a derivative. 
> > This is 
> > *not* true. Using a colour is what is says: use, which is not limited by the
> > licence.
> 
> I didn't claim so. Still you can't modify it.
> 
> > The ND option only serves to guarantee the correctness of the colour values
> > and the related colour codes. You can compare it to an open standard. The 
> > ODF > spec would be useless if anyone could modify the text 
> 
> But a "random" color palette is not a standard. And saying that, by Debians
> standards (DFSG, which the OSD is actually based on) standard texts or RFCs
> are not suitable for Debian main either.
> 

First of all, a colour palette is not code, it's content, so the Open Source
defifinition doesn't apply here.

Second, you can modify the palette. What you can't do is modify it and
distribute it under the same name, pretending it's the original version. The
colours themselves are (s)RGB values, which means they cannot be protected.
Everyone can modify the colour values and distribute a new palette, provided
they remove the colour codes (names) and any relationship with fF / fC and the
physical colour reference.

Third, this is not a "random" palette. It's a colour collection that has been
created with a lot of research and testing behind it.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Libreoffice-ux-advise mailing list
Libreoffice-ux-advise@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-ux-advise

[Libreoffice-ux-advise] [Bug 104052] Add LibreColour HLC palette

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=104052

--- Comment #15 from Christoph Schäfer  ---
(In reply to V Stuart Foote from comment #1)
> Spent some time in Scribus 1.5.2 and downloaded and installed the OCSC CIE
> HLC palette (via Windows -> Resources -> Palettes category). Not so sure
> this should be a palette to adopt as a replacement LibreOffice standard.soc
> in whole. 
> 
> Yes it has application for reproducible color management for desktop
> publishing support, but the HLC colors are rather muted--and the palette
> lacks handling  of the primary colors. Folks will find it too muted and not
> the best sRGB color space coverage.
> 
> Still it would be a useful palette to bundle, and perhaps provide some
> mechanism for import of the OCSC libary of palettes to LibreOffice.
> 
> Some technical issues on using the CIE HLC in LibreOffice.
> 
> As noted, would need to resolve how to label each color swatch to show in
> its tool-tip popup. Any freieFarbe / freeColour naming in Deutsch would have
> to be translated--or maybe better drop any color names and depend on the
> swatch viewer alone (similar is done now for a few of the palettes--where
> for some reason naming for cmyk uses CMY, and gallery uses CMYK) -- but
> which sRGB (decimal or HEX) or CMYK (decimal)?
> 
> And, if moving forward with an HLC based model, it is appropriate/necessary
> to rethink grid layout for the swatch display. 
> 
> Currently we use 12 columns--chosen to hold black, white and our 10
> increments of gray1 - gray10. Something like the HLC tables organized by Hue
> 000 -> 360 into 36 tables, would need to go into a 9 column layout, with
> divider between the Hues--and the table would need to describe swatch blanks
> for colors outside the sRGB color space.
> 
> Download Owen G.'s tonal_row.soc (attachment 105128 [details] from bug
> 80196) to $ORIGIN/share/palette and you can see challenge of the swatch view
> being fixed number of columns.
> 
> Also, since each swatch from a palette will be shown on opening the color
> picker, the color picker widget currently has no support for an HLC CIE LAB
> color reference. Rather, like Scribus, we provide only an HSV (i.e. our HSB
> panel) based color cylinder representation drawn from sRGB values in the
> .soc palette. Can conversions showing HLC field be added? 
> 
> 
> =-ref-=
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HSL_and_HSV
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HCL_color_space
> 
> http://cscheid.github.io/lux/demos/hcl/hcl.html

The HLC colours are "muted" for a reason: They can be replicated in CMYK, so if
you are working in a cross-media workflow (web and print) and need a maximum of
colour correctnes without resorting to spot colours, this is what you want.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Libreoffice-ux-advise mailing list
Libreoffice-ux-advise@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-ux-advise

[Libreoffice-ux-advise] [Bug 104052] Add LibreColour HLC palette

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=104052

--- Comment #14 from Rene Engelhard  ---
> What's the problem with this licence? We (freeColour) discussed the licensing 
> > options with an IP lawyer

that is probably the problem.

> and came to the conclusion that, to guarantee the > same outcome on all
> platforms and the reliability of the physical colour reference in connection
> with any programme, the ND option is the best.

Your opinion. But it violates the open source Defnition. Remember you are
contributing to a open source project (or well, Heiko did).

https://opensource.org/osd-annotated

So it's not something we should ship. 

> I've had this discussion in other contexts already, and the major concern was 
> > that using any of the colours in a document creates  a derivative. This is 
> *not* true. Using a colour is what is says: use, which is not limited by the
> licence.

I didn't claim so. Still you can't modify it.

> The ND option only serves to guarantee the correctness of the colour values
> and the related colour codes. You can compare it to an open standard. The ODF 
> > spec would be useless if anyone could modify the text 

But a "random" color palette is not a standard. And saying that, by Debians
standards (DFSG, which the OSD is actually based on) standard texts or RFCs are
not suitable for Debian main either.

Regards,

Rene

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Libreoffice-ux-advise mailing list
Libreoffice-ux-advise@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-ux-advise

[Libreoffice-ux-advise] [Bug 104052] Add LibreColour HLC palette

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=104052

--- Comment #13 from Christoph Schäfer  ---
What's the problem with this licence? We (freeColour) discussed the licensing
options with an IP lawyer and came to the conclusion that, to guarantee the
same outcome on all platforms and the reliability of the physical colour
reference in connection with any programme, the ND option is the best.

I've had this discussion in other contexts already, and the major concern was
that using any of the colours in a document creates  a derivative. This is
*not* true. Using a colour is what is says: use, which is not limited by the
licence.

The ND option only serves to guarantee the correctness of the colour values and
the related colour codes. You can compare it to an open standard. The ODF spec
would be useless if anyone could modify the text and distribute the modified
version as an original. It's the same with colours.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Libreoffice-ux-advise mailing list
Libreoffice-ux-advise@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-ux-advise

[Libreoffice-ux-advise] [Bug 102779] Notebookbar: Add spacing/padding around tab labels

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=102779

sophie  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||gautier.sop...@gmail.com

--- Comment #7 from sophie  ---
I agree with Adolfo here, finding double empty spaces as strings in our l10n
files are seen as bug in the process. Sophie

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Libreoffice-ux-advise mailing list
Libreoffice-ux-advise@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-ux-advise

[Libreoffice-ux-advise] [Bug 104052] Add LibreColour HLC palette

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=104052

--- Comment #12 from Jan Holesovsky  ---
Heiko: I am sorry, but I've reverted the commit for the moment...  Hopefully
the author will provide us with a version we can consume - can you please reach
out to him?

Thank you!

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Libreoffice-ux-advise mailing list
Libreoffice-ux-advise@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-ux-advise

[Libreoffice-ux-advise] [Bug 104052] Add LibreColour HLC palette

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=104052

--- Comment #11 from Commit Notification 
 ---
Jan Holesovsky committed a patch related to this issue.
It has been pushed to "master":

http://cgit.freedesktop.org/libreoffice/core/commit/?id=728c9a0d47b83910c5a9e38ac5c80f34fe3dfe54

Revert "tdf#104052 - Add LibreColor palette"

It will be available in 5.3.0.

The patch should be included in the daily builds available at
http://dev-builds.libreoffice.org/daily/ in the next 24-48 hours. More
information about daily builds can be found at:
http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Testing_Daily_Builds

Affected users are encouraged to test the fix and report feedback.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Libreoffice-ux-advise mailing list
Libreoffice-ux-advise@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-ux-advise

[Libreoffice-ux-advise] [Bug 104052] Add LibreColour HLC palette

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=104052

--- Comment #10 from Rene Engelhard  ---
no, Heiko, that is irrelevant.

*You* have to check the license. Who committed it or who is recorded as the
author/committer is totally non-relevant. There might be a procedural problem
here but the problem here is that YOU submitted a non-free file for committing.

That already shouldn't have happened.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Libreoffice-ux-advise mailing list
Libreoffice-ux-advise@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-ux-advise

[Libreoffice-ux-advise] [Bug 104052] Add LibreColour HLC palette

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=104052

--- Comment #9 from Heiko Tietze  ---
(In reply to Rene Engelhard from comment #8)
> Then you shouldn't have committed it. 

Commit service without the right to change the author and an overseen request
do to so was the reason for where we are. Just to mention that the procedure is
clear.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Libreoffice-ux-advise mailing list
Libreoffice-ux-advise@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-ux-advise

[Libreoffice-ux-advise] [Bug 104052] Add LibreColour HLC palette

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=104052

--- Comment #8 from Rene Engelhard  ---
Then you shouldn't have committed it. Blindly putting something in the tree is
bad. ALWAYS check licenses BEFORE.

(FWIW, I think you know it - but just going sure, mentioning something here is
not sufficient either, it has to be changed in the actual file.)

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Libreoffice-ux-advise mailing list
Libreoffice-ux-advise@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-ux-advise

[Libreoffice-ux-advise] [Bug 104052] Add LibreColour HLC palette

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=104052

--- Comment #7 from Heiko Tietze  ---
(In reply to Rene Engelhard from comment #6)
> https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/:
> 
> "NoDerivatives — If you remix, transform, or build upon the material, you
> may not distribute the modified material."
> 
> Definitely non-free.

That's how it was sent to me. Will ask Christoph to comment here about a normal
CC by-sa. The discussion about this palette run on the design mailinglist.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Libreoffice-ux-advise mailing list
Libreoffice-ux-advise@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-ux-advise

[Libreoffice-ux-advise] [Bug 104052] Add LibreColour HLC palette

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=104052

--- Comment #6 from Rene Engelhard  ---
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/:

"NoDerivatives — If you remix, transform, or build upon the material, you may
not distribute the modified material."

Definitely non-free.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Libreoffice-ux-advise mailing list
Libreoffice-ux-advise@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-ux-advise

[Libreoffice-ux-advise] [Bug 104052] Add LibreColour HLC palette

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=104052

--- Comment #5 from Rene Engelhard  ---
I think this should be reverted, and if it isn't until tonight when I am near
my ssh key I am going to do that myself.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Libreoffice-ux-advise mailing list
Libreoffice-ux-advise@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-ux-advise

[Libreoffice-ux-advise] [Bug 104052] Add LibreColour HLC palette

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=104052

--- Comment #4 from Rene Engelhard  ---
Heiko: erm, what? maybe it's wort to check licenses before committing (or in
this case: asking to commit stuff?

From

https://cgit.freedesktop.org/libreoffice/core/commit/?id=e92f098ae50c6de5f1ca4714cd77eb29e2b591cd:


diff --git a/extras/source/palettes/librecolour.soc
b/extras/source/palettes/librecolour.soc
new file mode 100644
index 000..e87cfaa
--- /dev/null
+++ b/extras/source/palettes/librecolour.soc
@@ -0,0 +1,1039 @@
+
+
+
[...]

NoDerivatives? WTF?

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Libreoffice-ux-advise mailing list
Libreoffice-ux-advise@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-ux-advise

[Libreoffice-ux-advise] [Bug 104048] Refresh html palette

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=104048

Heiko Tietze  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
 Ever confirmed|0   |1

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Libreoffice-ux-advise mailing list
Libreoffice-ux-advise@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-ux-advise

[Libreoffice-ux-advise] [Bug 104050] Add Breeze palette

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=104050

Heiko Tietze  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
 Ever confirmed|0   |1

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Libreoffice-ux-advise mailing list
Libreoffice-ux-advise@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-ux-advise

[Libreoffice-ux-advise] [Bug 104051] Refresh Tango palette

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=104051

Heiko Tietze  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
 Ever confirmed|0   |1

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Libreoffice-ux-advise mailing list
Libreoffice-ux-advise@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-ux-advise

[Libreoffice-ux-advise] [Bug 104052] Add LibreColour HLC palette

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=104052

Heiko Tietze  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
 Ever confirmed|0   |1

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Libreoffice-ux-advise mailing list
Libreoffice-ux-advise@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-ux-advise

[Libreoffice-ux-advise] [Bug 104052] Add LibreColour HLC palette

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=104052

Commit Notification  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Whiteboard||target:5.3.0

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Libreoffice-ux-advise mailing list
Libreoffice-ux-advise@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-ux-advise

[Libreoffice-ux-advise] [Bug 104052] Add LibreColour HLC palette

[bugzilla-daemon]

https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=104052

--- Comment #3 from Commit Notification 
 ---
heiko tietze committed a patch related to this issue.
It has been pushed to "master":

http://cgit.freedesktop.org/libreoffice/core/commit/?id=e92f098ae50c6de5f1ca4714cd77eb29e2b591cd

tdf#104052 - Add LibreColor palette

It will be available in 5.3.0.

The patch should be included in the daily builds available at
http://dev-builds.libreoffice.org/daily/ in the next 24-48 hours. More
information about daily builds can be found at:
http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Testing_Daily_Builds

Affected users are encouraged to test the fix and report feedback.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Libreoffice-ux-advise mailing list
Libreoffice-ux-advise@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice-ux-advise