Marc Paré wrote (21-12-12 19:03)
The problem here is where to use "LibreOffice" to mean both the
community and the product.
I do not know if this is a problem (in any case I did not yet experience
it), but...
I am proposing that a subtle visual aid would
perhaps help in marketing our commu
Hi Charles,
I'll keep it short as we have most likely argumented this enough to
agree to disagree.
Le 2012-12-21 12:39, Charles-H. Schulz a écrit :
I indeed think that you didn't get the memo (anyone follows the
board-discuss list here?). Marketing has been broken into two
"meta-tasks" or te
Hi Marc,
On 21/12/2012 19:03, Marc Paré wrote:
> Hi Sophie,
>
> Le 2012-12-21 11:49, Sophie Gautier a écrit :
>> Beside that, we didn't wait either to market the community, even if much
>> more should be done. Native language groups have already made huge
>> efforts to get new contributors at all
I have been following this discussion and I am still confused.
Why do we need two logos?
Other open source software have no problem with using one logo on their
main site and their community site.
Case in point :
http://www.pentaho.com/
and
http://community.pentaho.com/
use the exact same logo, bu
Hi Sophie,
Le 2012-12-21 11:49, Sophie Gautier a écrit :
Beside that, we didn't wait either to market the community, even if much
more should be done. Native language groups have already made huge
efforts to get new contributors at all levels and this has been done
using the same logo, most of t
Hello Marc,
Le vendredi 21 décembre 2012 à 12:14 -0500, Marc Paré a écrit :
> Le 2012-12-21 11:09, Charles-H. Schulz a écrit :
>
> > So we agree on the diagnostic only in part, and disagree on the
> > remedy ;-) . You are much more optimistic than I am on the brand
> > recognition. For sure we ha
Le 2012-12-21 11:09, Charles-H. Schulz a écrit :
So we agree on the diagnostic only in part, and disagree on the
remedy ;-) . You are much more optimistic than I am on the brand
recognition. For sure we had tremendous results but the brand
recognition is not where it should be. That's where we d
On 21/12/2012 17:09, Charles-H. Schulz wrote:
> Le vendredi 21 décembre 2012 à 10:50 -0500, Marc Paré a écrit :
>> Le 2012-12-21 10:11, Charles-H. Schulz a écrit :
>>> Hello Marc,
>>
We should also get Italo's opinion on this as well, and, make a note of
the decision so that we do no
Le vendredi 21 décembre 2012 à 10:50 -0500, Marc Paré a écrit :
> Le 2012-12-21 10:11, Charles-H. Schulz a écrit :
> > Hello Marc,
>
> >>
> >> We should also get Italo's opinion on this as well, and, make a note of
> >> the decision so that we do not go over it again.
> >>
> >> A lot of the confus
Hi Marc,
How do you suggest users "adopt" a community?
On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 4:50 PM, Marc Paré wrote:
> Le 2012-12-21 10:11, Charles-H. Schulz a écrit :
>
>> Hello Marc,
>>
>
>
>>> We should also get Italo's opinion on this as well, and, make a note of
>>> the decision so that we do not go
Le 2012-12-21 10:11, Charles-H. Schulz a écrit :
Hello Marc,
We should also get Italo's opinion on this as well, and, make a note of
the decision so that we do not go over it again.
A lot of the confusion is that the community and community-product ->
"LibreOffice Suite" share the same logo.
Hello Marc,
Le vendredi 21 décembre 2012 à 09:42 -0500, Marc Paré a écrit :
> Le 2012-12-21 06:38, Charles-H. Schulz a écrit :
>
> >
> > Can someone point to a rationale about having a logo for the community
> > that would be different from the logo we use everyday? We have two
> > logos. One whi
Le 2012-12-21 06:38, Charles-H. Schulz a écrit :
Can someone point to a rationale about having a logo for the community
that would be different from the logo we use everyday? We have two
logos. One which can only be used with explicit written permission (the
one with the TDF subline) and one th
Hi,
Le vendredi 21 décembre 2012 à 02:58 -0500, Marc Paré a écrit :
> Hi Florian et al,
>
> Le 2012-12-08 06:19, Florian Monfort a écrit :
> > Can I have the sources from this precise file please?
> >
> > It's too small to integrate well with the Community logo resolution
> > standard, I need it
Hi Florian et al,
Le 2012-12-08 06:19, Florian Monfort a écrit :
Can I have the sources from this precise file please?
It's too small to integrate well with the Community logo resolution
standard, I need it bigger and with a larger alpha channel
http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/File:Libocomm
Sure :). I'm not against any of that!
--
Florian Monfort
Marketing Apprentice at Red Hat
Marketing Team at The Document Foundation
Student at France Business School
+33 6 58 97 15 61
florian.monf...@gmail.com
On Dec 18, 2012 10:04 AM, "Marc Paré" wrote:
> Hi Florian et al,
>
>
> Le 2012-12-08 07
Hi Florian et al,
Le 2012-12-08 07:06, Charles-H. Schulz a écrit :
Hmm, I'm really not so sure I like the new logo. Florian, would you mind
replacing it by our standard logo? Perhaps we can launch a design contest
afterwards.
Thanks,
Charles.
2012/12/8 Florian Monfort
Nope, but I think tha
I do not remember the "older" logo for "community" but I like this one.
It does imply "community" to me, just like the Writer logo implies a
"text document".
On 12/08/2012 07:09 AM, Florian Monfort wrote:
Hi Charles,
Even if it's not as good, it is still more relevant for a Community than
> But why? Isn't the foundation supposed to represent the community? :-)
OK, let's say the Foundation and the community are one thing, and
LibreOffice other thing (the "Product"). Why should the first thing
share its logo with the latter? :)
--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to marketing+h...@
2012/12/8 Adolfo Jayme Barrientos
> On Sat, Dec 8, 2012 at 6:11 AM, Charles-H. Schulz
> wrote:
> > I am sorry... but why is it relevant? LibreOffice is the community.
> There's
> > no LibreOffice and the community.
>
> I think he meant the Foundation and the community. These are not the
> same,
On Sat, Dec 8, 2012 at 6:11 AM, Charles-H. Schulz
wrote:
> I am sorry... but why is it relevant? LibreOffice is the community. There's
> no LibreOffice and the community.
I think he meant the Foundation and the community. These are not the
same, and shouldn't have the same logo.
--
Unsubscribe
Florian,
I am sorry... but why is it relevant? LibreOffice is the community. There's
no LibreOffice and the community.
Best,
Charles.
2012/12/8 Florian Monfort
> Hi Charles,
>
> Even if it's not as good, it is still more relevant for a Community than
> the standard logo ;)
>
> Let's launch a
Hi Charles,
Even if it's not as good, it is still more relevant for a Community than
the standard logo ;)
Let's launch a contest, but it is important to differenciate the Community
from the official page.
On Sat, Dec 8, 2012 at 1:06 PM, Charles-H. Schulz <
charles.sch...@documentfoundation.org>
Hmm, I'm really not so sure I like the new logo. Florian, would you mind
replacing it by our standard logo? Perhaps we can launch a design contest
afterwards.
Thanks,
Charles.
2012/12/8 Florian Monfort
> Nope, but I think that brings up a very interesting point : two pages is
> maybe too much.
Nope, but I think that brings up a very interesting point : two pages is
maybe too much. I think we should choose between a LibreOffice and a
Document Foundation page. Having both brings confusion.
On Sat, Dec 8, 2012 at 12:43 PM, Hillar Liiv wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Is https://plus.google.com/+libr
Cover photo has been changed for the Google+ page ! :)
On Sat, Dec 8, 2012 at 12:19 PM, Florian Monfort
wrote:
> Can I have the sources from this precise file please?
>
> It's too small to integrate well with the Community logo resolution
> standard, I need it bigger and with a larger alpha chan
Can I have the sources from this precise file please?
It's too small to integrate well with the Community logo resolution
standard, I need it bigger and with a larger alpha channel
http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/File:Libocommunity.png
Thanks!
On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 10:00 PM, Hillar Liiv w
27 matches
Mail list logo
