Hello everyone, Le Tue, 01 Feb 2011 13:04:53 -0500, drew <d...@baseanswers.com> a écrit :
> On Tue, 2011-02-01 at 02:29 +0100, Andrea Pescetti wrote: > > On 31/01/2011 drew wrote: > > > On Mon, 2011-01-31 at 07:56 +0100, Stefan Weigel wrote: > > > > For me, there is absolutely nothing against presenting support > > > > for LibreOffice at sites that use OpenOffice.org branding. > > > > I'd say I agree with Stefan's opinion here; but in general my point > > would be that the rebranding will mean a significantly reduced > > visibility in search engines (since all links will point to the old > > site), with the effect of hiding the work of volunteers over years; > > so while a rebranding could make sense in theory, I see some > > practical problems with it (problems that did not apply for > > instance to OOoAuthors: there the rebranding is welcome and does > > not damage users). > > > > > I can tell you with absolute certainty that some of the people > > > responsible for the decision to support Libo on OO.o project > > > specific sties are doing so out of the same feeling of > > > inclusiveness they applied when supporting Go-OO and NeoOffice. > > > Further that during the discussion to do so there was at no time > > > an agreement in any way that Libo = OO.o > > > > Yes Drew, and this is the cooperation spirit I see on the Italian > > forum now; everyone gives support to everyone for the common parts, > > and specificities are covered correctly and peacefully. > > > > > but there was and is the acceptance that the time will come when > > > the two products are not close enough to be supported on a single > > > site. > > > > This seems a rather forward-looking statement. When the time comes > > that the shared codebase is really tiny I'll agree on this, but I > > don't see it happening reasonably early (say, in 2011). Splitting a > > community that is not split (i.e., making two sites out of one) > > would likely need to be justified by a real difference in code. > > > > Regards, > > Hola Andrea > > Well, I was not speaking of re-branding anything my desire was for > this project to embrace the idea that it is something new and > separate. I will acknowledge that this seems not to be the view of > the majority within the current contributors and speak of it no more. > > Best wishes, > > Drew I think I and others could elaborate why we agree or disagree with respect to the legacy of OOo inside TDF and LibO. But whether one shares the opinion that LibO is the future of OOo or its replacement (which is my opinion) or whether one shares the opinion that it is a new thing, in the end this project is going to bear the legacy of the OOo project and integrate new elements and new beginnings. I think what is perhaps necessary for everyone is that -legacy questions set aside- users convenience is required to think about user forums. The real question in some time (6 months to one year) will be: does it make sense to have an openoffice.org URL? Are the users confused? how about a clearer branding? etc, etc. I would therefore suggest to have a pragmatic approach that also integrates the notion that there is a legacy anyway, knowing it should not hinder anyone for bad reasons, fear, etc. Best, -- Charles-H. Schulz Membre du Comité exécutif The Document Foundation. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to website+h...@libreoffice.org List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/website/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
