The Edition Matter

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
26 messages Options
Next » 12
Telesto Telesto
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

The Edition Matter

First of, Italo Vignoli, thanks for the new marketing plan and the
procedural schedule. This certainly puts me in a better mood in advance!
I'm prepared to go along with the idea of edition + banner.

However please don't use terminology charged with connotations.
Community Edition and Personal Edition are simply to problematic by
itself (which illustrated in the sheets nicely)
Also "Edition" maybe also problematic.

So I personally would like to avoid those (Community/Personal, and maybe
even Edition)
We need to find something more neutral. Not having brilliant idea on the
top of my head.
So hopefully someone else will come up with something.

Some attempts:
LibreOffice shipped by TDF.
LibreOffice TDF release.
LibreOffice distributed/compiled by TDF.
LibreOffice made possible by TDF.

Or if we want to hold on to Edition, as it makes the existence of
variants more clear, maybe LibreOffice Libre Edition.
Libre Edition doesn't mean anything. And everybody can read his or her
interpretation of Libre in it (Free Software; Open Source).
Yes, LibreOffice has Libre in it. However it doesn't sound that bad. And
maybe some additional string in the about, like:
"This edition is supported by volunteers."
"This edition lacks professional support"
"This edition isn't professionally supported. Learn more about
professional support, click here"

---
About the visibility of the 'Edition" branding. Can be in the Start
Center (sidebar/ or art work) and About.
Major requirement: it should blend with the dialogs (being 'natural'
look). Not being intrusive: screaming bold black/or red letters with bad
font taste (as initially)
They artwork is always pretty nice, so let the designers design. Which
blends in, but being still noticeable enough.
I personally don't think the Title Bar should be touched. As it doesn't
fit nicely on the task tray on Windows. And MacOS has non, I think.
Be maybe just me simply not used to it :-)

Regards,
Telesto




--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: [hidden email]
Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: https://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/marketing/
Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy
Mike Saunders Mike Saunders
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: The Edition Matter

Hey Telesto,

On 12/10/2020 23:30, Telesto wrote:
>
> Some attempts:
> LibreOffice shipped by TDF.
> LibreOffice TDF release.
> LibreOffice distributed/compiled by TDF.
> LibreOffice made possible by TDF.

The logo already has "The Document Foundation" underneath, so I don't
think this really adds anything. And just leads people to wonder what
that actually means. I think a word like "Community" makes it more clear
that it's not an enterprise product.

Just my 2C...

Mike

--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: [hidden email]
Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: https://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/marketing/
Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy
Telesto Telesto
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: The Edition Matter

> Hey Telesto,
>
> On 12/10/2020 23:30, Telesto wrote:
>> Some attempts:
>> LibreOffice shipped by TDF.
>> LibreOffice TDF release.
>> LibreOffice distributed/compiled by TDF.
>> LibreOffice made possible by TDF.
> The logo already has "The Document Foundation" underneath, so I don't
> think this really adds anything. And just leads people to wonder what
> that actually means. I think a word like "Community" makes it more clear
> that it's not an enterprise product.
Valid objection against using TDF. I would even say, using TDF makes
TDFt a software vendor.
Which isn't ideal. FWIW: they where only some proposals out of
brainstorming mode :-)

However I expect Community Edition to be misinterpreted rather often.
It might be a trimmed down version. Or to be used by the Community (so
not for not-community members)
So 'simply' community edition is a no go. So if you want to go for
Community , I should be "Community supported edition, or something similar.

----
In general. I'm happy with 'critics' on my suggestions.  However I would
like people to split up their opinion (in steps).
Makes it easier keeping track on positions taken. Else everything is
mixed together and makes it hard to distill positions out the arguments
made.

1) Supported of rejecting the 'Edition' topic (which technically of the
table, but supports of that are probably still to be found)
2) Agreeing or disagreeing about Community/ Personal carrying
connotations (loaded terminology)
3) Assessment if the 'connotation' topic can be overcome. Say be
explaining the meaning in the current context. I personally don't think
you can ever 'solve' the connotation issue
4) If you agree with 2-3, proposals how this suggestions can be avoided
(or expressing support of already offered options).

FWIW:W And offering support to a proposal doesn't mean you bound by it
definitively. This is work in progress, so may change of mind because
the follow up comments etc.
Nothing bad/evil about that.
I assume the final say will be a vote of some kind (with closed
questions). Even with a clear outcome here.. Not sure if everybody wants
to participate in the discussion (or having the time to do so).

For the record, people who are against any Edition branding, simply say so.
Don't go into sabotaging/abuse mode. So acknowledging problem with
editions, seeing as a problem,
and followed by bluntly rejecting everything on the table. To simply to
frustrate the process. In the hope of creating an impasse of some kind.
We want to be constructive.

So at point 4, if you reject all the suggestions on the table, please
give at least one (reasonable) alternative.
It's more constructive compared to say I dislike everything (which can
be true opinion or sabotaging)
Rejecting something pretty easy, thinking about an alternative could be
'hard'.

Regards,
Telesto



--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: [hidden email]
Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: https://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/marketing/
Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy
marcpare4 marcpare4
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: The Edition Matter


I suggest we try to keep it as honest as possible. The membership should
speak out on this item re: "edition".

IMO, "Community Edition" is fine, and agree that this could be modified
at a future date when the membership would review the edition labels;
perhaps reviewed every 4-5 years or something of the like.

We profess how we are a community and collective of many different
language groups working on the project, whether it be coders, designers,
translation, docs, etc. So, in my mind "community" is the exact
description. It does not bring up the idea of setting any commercial
ties, etc. If members outside of the community, users, decide to adopt
LibreOffice, then they do so and enjoy the fruits of the wonderful
software solution that LibreOffice brings to them.

As for any commercial versions of LibreOffice, they (the people behind
"commercializing" LibreOffice) should also be made to abide by a
membership-decided label. I like the idea of "Powered by ..." label, not
sure if this would infringe on any trademarks.

But, by and large, should any organization wish to use the LibreOffice
suite as we know, coming from the community, then no problem. Just that,
at this point, no commercial support is built into the community project
for such a beast, Having a robust list of commercial businesses,
advertised on the LibreOffice website, that can help install LibreOffice
for commercial usage, IMO, is pretty well an accepted solution to most
who run businesses and search for commercial application solutions. In
this day of age, most businesses are used to seeing a community
opensource version of software with an alternate commercial version of
the same for a price.

So, for me, "Community Edition" is fine. We would also need to decide on
the commercial label at the same time, of which, I prefer "Powered by ...".

Cheers,

Marc

--
Marc Paré
[hidden email]
https://www.parEntreprise.com
parEntreprise.com Supports OpenDocument Formats (ODF)
parEntreprise.com Supports http://www.LibreOffice.org
LibreOffice Office Suite - 220 million users and growing!
Over 1,000 project developers with impeccable help from its user base.



--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: [hidden email]
Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: https://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/marketing/
Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy
Italo Vignoli-6 Italo Vignoli-6
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: The Edition Matter

The commercial label is Enterprise, while "powered by..." can be part of
the product name. We should remember that we are discussing a label and
not a product name, which does not change and is LibreOffice.

The label is an attribute, with the objective of adding information to
the product name.

On 10/13/20 3:17 PM, Marc Paré wrote:

>
> I suggest we try to keep it as honest as possible. The membership should
> speak out on this item re: "edition".
>
> IMO, "Community Edition" is fine, and agree that this could be modified
> at a future date when the membership would review the edition labels;
> perhaps reviewed every 4-5 years or something of the like.
>
> We profess how we are a community and collective of many different
> language groups working on the project, whether it be coders, designers,
> translation, docs, etc. So, in my mind "community" is the exact
> description. It does not bring up the idea of setting any commercial
> ties, etc. If members outside of the community, users, decide to adopt
> LibreOffice, then they do so and enjoy the fruits of the wonderful
> software solution that LibreOffice brings to them.
>
> As for any commercial versions of LibreOffice, they (the people behind
> "commercializing" LibreOffice) should also be made to abide by a
> membership-decided label. I like the idea of "Powered by ..." label, not
> sure if this would infringe on any trademarks.
>
> But, by and large, should any organization wish to use the LibreOffice
> suite as we know, coming from the community, then no problem. Just that,
> at this point, no commercial support is built into the community project
> for such a beast, Having a robust list of commercial businesses,
> advertised on the LibreOffice website, that can help install LibreOffice
> for commercial usage, IMO, is pretty well an accepted solution to most
> who run businesses and search for commercial application solutions. In
> this day of age, most businesses are used to seeing a community
> opensource version of software with an alternate commercial version of
> the same for a price.
>
> So, for me, "Community Edition" is fine. We would also need to decide on
> the commercial label at the same time, of which, I prefer "Powered by ...".
>
> Cheers,
>
> Marc
>

--
Italo Vignoli - LibreOffice Marketing & PR
mobile/signal +39.348.5653829 - email [hidden email]
hangout/jabber [hidden email] - skype italovignoli
GPG Key ID - 0xAAB8D5C0
DB75 1534 3FD0 EA5F 56B5 FDA6 DE82 934C AAB8 D5C0

--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: [hidden email]
Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: https://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/marketing/
Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy
Telesto Telesto
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: The Edition Matter

In reply to this post by marcpare4

> So, for me, "Community Edition" is fine. We would also need to decide on
> the commercial label at the same time, of which, I prefer "Powered by ...".
Related to the 'Community Edition' I point to page 54 of
https://nextcloud.documentfoundation.org/s/qPMWRFsxwQ6QFpK#pdfviewer
Which is summery of the discussion at BoD mailing list . Which gives a
taste what can go wrong :-)
Prefer the avoid the confusion in advance. So I tend to opt for
something else.
However if the majority -or should we opt for qualitative majority
instead of simple majority,
recalling narrow majority on the Brexit vote - wants this, fine. I will
back down

I'm also having some issues to get to the a clear picture a (single)
"Community".
I see it more as decentralized community's, compared to a single
'coherent' TDF LibreOffice community/family.
You can divide it linguistically There is the France community, German
community, Spanish community.
Or maybe task based: developers community. A QA community :-).
Translation community.
Or maybe you can draw a line between company community and unassociated
people.
It are more or less in depend groups working together, under umbrella of
a community.

And at a centralized TDF community there is a vision. Maybe even a
independent group for coordination stuff like Quality Assurance.
Not the 'current' actual QA work, but actually Assurance. So trying to
bring LibreOffice to a higher level.
However this centralized coordination isn't present. And not really
wanted either. TDF code repro is more a container.
Where (privately written created code) is dropped and pulled by others.
And visa versa. There is no coordination at TDF.
TDF is in some sense more or less a conduit where code passes through,
without any influence.
The Quality Control is done at eco-system partner company level. And
flows into TDF. However it's uncoordinated process.
Everybody is only rudimentally awareness of what people are doing of
preparing to do. There is no plan, no roadmaps, vision,
of what LibreOffice should be in 1, 2 or 5 years. No quality improvement
initiatives strategy or something similar coming from TDF.

So pretty lose bunch of people.

Eco-systems partners (and their employees, mostly developers), are big
(and essential) part of the community.
Professionally as personally. So it's not a community of equals.

There is also a topic how much the 'Community Edition' diverges from
'Enterprise' Edition.
As Community Edition suggests a 'material' product difference between
Enterprise Edition (or this the common expectation).
And Community Supported edition would make clear it's only related to
support, not software as such.
However they eco-system partners playing a big part in they community.
However they don't deliver actual community support.
They bug fixing they are doing is primarily done in their own interest
from my perspective

So LibreOffice Libre Edition. And Edition free of connotations. And
being free. You can spin write whatever story you want around it :-).
I'm fan of story telling :-).

You could even say: LibreOffice powered by the (LibreOffice)
community/volunteers/TDF without the  'Edition label'
Or LibreOffice powered by volunteers.

Next topic. I would suggest to also include some additional line in the
about box below the edition
Largely made possible by contributions of CIB; Collabora; RedHat and
others (with reference the LibreOffice site).
This edition isn't professionally supported. Learn more about
professional support, click here"

This of course they gray area of blending advertising/'branding' with
free product.
However it's they truth those are large contributors and the should have
some credits all the work they are doing.
Except of the hairy area of phrasing a proper sentence, without
disrespecting they contribution of others.
It should be possible to get some objective criteria (rules) about who
are shown in the about box.
I see it as a thank you for the all the code sharing they are doing
:-).  They deserve credit for the work (and investments).

However someone will likely object :-). Because doesn't match the core
values ideals of FLOSS or open source etc etc.
Or LibreOffice being 'free' project/product without company involvement.
Or the contributions of everybody being equal to their power.
The reality is however that LibreOffice at TDF is made possible/ backed
by the contributions of major (commercial) partners.
You can argue this should be the case, or simply a incident. However,
where in they history of LibreOffice/OpenOffice/StarOffice did it go
without
a commercial company backing the development? [Hope I remember enough;
didn't verify my statement]
They desire that LibreOffice being developed by independent people
without financial interest sounds like an utopia to me.

I would like a more pragmatic approach. Which is more in line with
reality/ factual setting.
Instead of pretending as the community is based work only done by
volunteers. A huge part is simply done my professionals with commercial
interest.
Those professionals are part of community (all the time), but not always
in the role of volunteer.
They professionals are wearing the volunteer head once in a while, doing
extra's in their free time. Or for non-market standard fee etc. (or in
any other way)
But surely don't have the role of volunteer all the when working on
LibreOffice (or should I say ecosystem partners products, which code
merged into TDF branch).
Same setting is present at BoD TDF. Few of those members doing the work
'as volunteer' for TDF, but also keeping tabs for their business so a
commercial interest.
Visa versa bring in the commercial perspective into TDF; which of course
reasonable. Except this sometimes ends in a kind of COI matter where TDF
and business vision not totally align.

My 'plea' create a little more awareness of the company's backing
LibreOffice powered by TDF. Making it more clear how 'LibreOffice' is
created.
Note: No affiliation with eco-partners.  I'm simply finding it
reasonable and respectful to give the credit (and helping them to build
a business).
But I'm aware this hairy topic with strings attached (complications).
Say: what happens if large contributors stops contributing.
What if a new group of people start contributing. Why only business and
not individuals? So putting this forward as suggestion to think about.

Cheers,

Telesto

FWIW no objection again re-evaluating as such. I'm favoring this.
However, be warned: a new change isn't that easy.
Related to my own experience at QA. The progressives and the conservatives.
I'm still trying to get certain feature, currently enabled by default,
disabled (by default). As I asses this to be a mistake; different
weighting of priority's
I also have some 'axioms'/ theory backing it. However to group who likes
those enabled - are now used to it. So the are a potentially angry mob.
The unknown about presence, size and scale angry mob, combined with they
argument that we don't want to experiment (risk a flipflop back and
forward),
nothing will happen. Gridlock. We know what we have now, we don't know
what we will get. Proof your proposal will work better. Which I
obviously can't.
And I don't expect this topic to be really different. So this decision
can be changed theoretically be might be 'final' in practice.
And might take years of lobbying to be changed again. Only in a certain
(star) constellation this might happen.



--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: [hidden email]
Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: https://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/marketing/
Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy
Nigel Verity Nigel Verity
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: The Edition Matter

In reply to this post by Italo Vignoli-6
Hi Mike

Although I cannot think of a suitable alternative I have slight reservations about the use of the term "community". It may be just a British thing but in the UK the term is slightly nuanced to mean "good but not the very best", e.g The community hall is often the venue for amateur entertainment, run by a panel of well-intentioned but usually inexperienced untrained volunteers.

With that background I feel that to many ears the "community edition" of LibreOffice may be judged to be a slightly inferior version - a bit like the difference between MS Office Home Edition and MS Office Professional.

Regards

Nige

 LibreOffice - Free and open source office suite: LibreOffice Website<https://www.libreoffice.org>
 Respects your privacy, and gives you back control over your data

________________________________
From: Italo Vignoli <[hidden email]>
Sent: 13 October 2020 16:56
To: [hidden email] <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [libreoffice-marketing] The Edition Matter

The commercial label is Enterprise, while "powered by..." can be part of
the product name. We should remember that we are discussing a label and
not a product name, which does not change and is LibreOffice.

The label is an attribute, with the objective of adding information to
the product name.

On 10/13/20 3:17 PM, Marc Paré wrote:

>
> I suggest we try to keep it as honest as possible. The membership should
> speak out on this item re: "edition".
>
> IMO, "Community Edition" is fine, and agree that this could be modified
> at a future date when the membership would review the edition labels;
> perhaps reviewed every 4-5 years or something of the like.
>
> We profess how we are a community and collective of many different
> language groups working on the project, whether it be coders, designers,
> translation, docs, etc. So, in my mind "community" is the exact
> description. It does not bring up the idea of setting any commercial
> ties, etc. If members outside of the community, users, decide to adopt
> LibreOffice, then they do so and enjoy the fruits of the wonderful
> software solution that LibreOffice brings to them.
>
> As for any commercial versions of LibreOffice, they (the people behind
> "commercializing" LibreOffice) should also be made to abide by a
> membership-decided label. I like the idea of "Powered by ..." label, not
> sure if this would infringe on any trademarks.
>
> But, by and large, should any organization wish to use the LibreOffice
> suite as we know, coming from the community, then no problem. Just that,
> at this point, no commercial support is built into the community project
> for such a beast, Having a robust list of commercial businesses,
> advertised on the LibreOffice website, that can help install LibreOffice
> for commercial usage, IMO, is pretty well an accepted solution to most
> who run businesses and search for commercial application solutions. In
> this day of age, most businesses are used to seeing a community
> opensource version of software with an alternate commercial version of
> the same for a price.
>
> So, for me, "Community Edition" is fine. We would also need to decide on
> the commercial label at the same time, of which, I prefer "Powered by ...".
>
> Cheers,
>
> Marc
>

--
Italo Vignoli - LibreOffice Marketing & PR
mobile/signal +39.348.5653829 - email [hidden email]
hangout/jabber [hidden email] - skype italovignoli
GPG Key ID - 0xAAB8D5C0
DB75 1534 3FD0 EA5F 56B5 FDA6 DE82 934C AAB8 D5C0

--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: [hidden email]
Problems? https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.libreoffice.org%2Fget-help%2Fmailing-lists%2Fhow-to-unsubscribe%2F&amp;data=02%7C01%7C%7C6f40dddcbb7047fc200d08d86f90b668%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637382014607352298&amp;sdata=tnK961Aty%2B8HedGm%2BcTmGMDwqnFAE1VWLxMLnIjuwjE%3D&amp;reserved=0
Posting guidelines + more: https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwiki.documentfoundation.org%2FNetiquette&amp;data=02%7C01%7C%7C6f40dddcbb7047fc200d08d86f90b668%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637382014607357287&amp;sdata=Sozxk%2Bt8AoJvqVnuMdgO1lw9iEZSeJMdYAhhvGJo4Qo%3D&amp;reserved=0
List archive: https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flistarchives.libreoffice.org%2Fglobal%2Fmarketing%2F&amp;data=02%7C01%7C%7C6f40dddcbb7047fc200d08d86f90b668%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637382014607357287&amp;sdata=QIIfnORIkN2CfGUviT6exWOWCXUpxEb3ZYkPUUUxXJI%3D&amp;reserved=0
Privacy Policy: https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.documentfoundation.org%2Fprivacy&amp;data=02%7C01%7C%7C6f40dddcbb7047fc200d08d86f90b668%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637382014607357287&amp;sdata=fdVHOAegSDBK7ad6wckNHFTwsMUx0wBB9mVsiMu1ZHw%3D&amp;reserved=0

--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: [hidden email]
Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: https://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/marketing/
Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy

Cor Nouws Cor Nouws
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: The Edition Matter

In reply to this post by Telesto
Hi Telesto,

Let me confess that I only read a part of the discussions - I'm simply
not able to keep up with all.
But I am interested in opinions and reasons for ideas. So I have a question:

Telesto wrote on 13/10/2020 18:26:

> ....

(skipping may lines with IMO logic ideas/POVs - thanks for describing
those.)

> Visa versa bring in the commercial perspective into TDF; which of course
> reasonable. Except this sometimes ends in a kind of COI matter where TDF
> and business vision not totally align.

I'm triggered by the "Except this sometimes ..." reading it as that is
'not reasonable'.
Can you pls explain that a bit more?
To explain why I wonder: I think for sure it is not always practical or
easy, to have to work with conflicts of interest. But isn't it
unavoidable if you have foundation that hosts an open source community
where all kind of contributors are active (like you so clearly
explained). And also of course, there are more and other personal
interest of people in LibreOffice/TDF than just the fact that they earn
(part of) the living with it.

Maybe I missed some other part of your text, not sure ;0

Thanks,
Cor


--
Cor Nouws
GPD key ID: 0xB13480A6 - 591A 30A7 36A0 CE3C 3D28  A038 E49D 7365 B134 80A6
- vrijwilliger https://nl.libreoffice.org
- volunteer https://www.libreoffice.org
- Member Board The Document Foundation
- marketing @CollaboraOffice
- ceo www.nouenoff.nl
- initiator www.mijncloudoffice.nl

--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: [hidden email]
Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: https://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/marketing/
Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy
marcpare4 marcpare4
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: The Edition Matter

In reply to this post by Nigel Verity
Le 2020-10-13 à 14 h 48, Nigel Verity a écrit :

> Hi Mike
>
> Although I cannot think of a suitable alternative I have slight reservations about the use of the term "community". It may be just a British thing but in the UK the term is slightly nuanced to mean "good but not the very best", e.g The community hall is often the venue for amateur entertainment, run by a panel of well-intentioned but usually inexperienced untrained volunteers.
>
> With that background I feel that to many ears the "community edition" of LibreOffice may be judged to be a slightly inferior version - a bit like the difference between MS Office Home Edition and MS Office Professional.
>
> Regards
>
> Nige
>
>  LibreOffice - Free and open source office suite: LibreOffice Website<https://www.libreoffice.org>
>  Respects your privacy, and gives you back control over your data
>
>
Hi Nige,

However, if you Google-search on the terms "Community Edition", you will
find an abundance of opensource "Community Editions" out there, some of
which are large projects. If this particular label is adopted, the
TDF/LibreOffice should be clear on defining the meaning of the terms of
"LibreOffice Community Edition". Clear messaging is important on large
projects as many different cultures are served and different combination
of terms may or may not bring on multiple connotations. So, the
TDF/LibreOffice should be clear in stating its reasons for adopting any
labels, product names etc. on the LibreOffice and TDF websites.

BTW ... I like your signature! Great!

Cheers,

Marc

--
Marc Paré
[hidden email]
https://www.parEntreprise.com
parEntreprise.com Supports OpenDocument Formats (ODF)
parEntreprise.com Supports http://www.LibreOffice.org
LibreOffice Office Suite - 220 million users and growing!
Over 1,000 project developers with impeccable help from its user base.



--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: [hidden email]
Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: https://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/marketing/
Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy
marcpare4 marcpare4
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: The Edition Matter

In reply to this post by Telesto
Hi Telesto,

Thanks for the large reply, of which, from what I gather is that you are
saying that the definition of "Community" can be viewed from many
perspectives. My comment to this is, this is where the TDF/LibreOffice
needs to message in a clearer way on the website as to its definition of
"community", just to make it crystal clear. We all come from different
cultures, I am Canadian, and in particular French-Canadian, so, my
interpretation of "community" will be nuanced by my cultural background.
However, if a clear definition on the TDF and LibreOffice offers a clear
message of the definition of "community" then it can be treated as our
reference-guide.

As for giving credit to the coding enterprises that makes in large part
what LibreOffice is, sure, I am on side with this. However, let's not
forget that others have committed resources to the project. One example
of such is the group of national domain holders who provide LibreOffice
brand legal cover in various countries. For example, www.LibreOffice.ca
is owned and supported by a Canadian individual who supports this cover
(as well as other .ca domains), as well as potential liability. This
hidden group is never spoken of, and, never credited for giving help to
the project. There are many non-TDF-members on the docs team who also
support through great effort and also some who base their doc support
through their business who are also part of this large hidden group. And
this is just the tip of some of the hidden groups who are generally left
with no credit for their efforts.

So, essentially, we should credit all who contribute to the project.
But, sure, I completely agree, that the project should acknowledge in
particular the ecosystem-partners as a strategy of moving the project on
in the for-profit ecosystem, we should definitely consider this
acknowledgement. But, with the hopes that the ecosystem-partners also
realize the nature of the LibreOffice project's mission and vision is
the heartbeat of the organization.

As for your comments on timely re-evaluations, and the potential mess it
may/does create. This is just part of the process. Membership talk is
healthy, whether negative or positive. Learning how to work in a project
with some give-and-take is healthy. We should all embrace any kind of
conversation. We all come from different backgrounds, culture and knowledge.

Cheers,

Marc

--
Marc Paré
[hidden email]
https://www.parEntreprise.com
parEntreprise.com Supports OpenDocument Formats (ODF)
parEntreprise.com Supports http://www.LibreOffice.org
LibreOffice Office Suite - 220 million users and growing!
Over 1,000 project developers with impeccable help from its user base.



--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: [hidden email]
Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: https://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/marketing/
Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy
Telesto Telesto
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: The Edition Matter


Op 14-10-2020 om 15:52 schreef Marc Paré:
> Hi Telesto,
>
> Thanks for the large reply, of which, from what I gather is that you are
> saying that the definition of "Community" can be viewed from many
> perspectives.

True. And one of those is Commercial Company's sharing a limited version
under
the label "Community Edition". They obvious example being Visual Studio
Community Edition.
Not sure how many more examples there are.

The other problem is that's bit of empty shell. Not sure what community
edition should represent.
What edition part entails. Editions point to difference. A common
approach is to see community edition as
functional limited edition (look at VS Community).

Also they community is largely, formed by same people who build the
Enterprise Edition.
The Enterprise Edition is more or less they Community Edition. So they
edition is actually a LTS variant with some extra's (and professional
support)
So they core difference isn't they edition, but the support and area for
deployment (Enterprises environments versus home environments)

Another issue I have is that I don't see a actual (coherent, cohesive,
harmonic) community. It are lots of lose fractions (decentralized).
They developers are a pretty tight group of people (with few of QA). And
maybe the key figures at Infra/Marketing/UX.
Lets call it the core family. GSoC students, QA members are simply bunch
of people scrambled together (maybe the same at Ask)
Coming, going, doing whatever they want. So they community is build out
of core and number of people floating around.
There are no 'common' values or something like that within the
community(if you ask me). There a quite a number of vision about what
LibreOffice by TDF represents.

Everybody has it's own reason for contributing. And even their own
vision what LibreOffice is :-).
 From the perspective of they eco-system partners TDF might be
intermediary between different contributors (to share code. And an
giving a testing user base.
Other group of members at TDF sees LibrOffice as independent project,
with it's own purpose. So TDF board could disagree with eco-system partners.
There is a group who approaches it from FLOSS perspective.  They might
object against edition and say marketing eco-system partners inside
FLOSS product.

There is discussion about LibreOffice being a project or product. For
they eco-systems partners it's certainly also a product (you have to buy
a license).
They have customers, customer wants a tool. They product delivers they
tool they want. The code changes also flow into LibreOffice TDF edition.

I - personally - see mission/ purpose (partly) in serving need of users.
So delivering a (free) market standard open source Office Suite.
 From my perspective it's even possible to have QA committee at TDF body
in an attempt focus more on bugs ruining the user experience. And that
LibreOffice includes listing to 'the people'
To make LibreOffice a nice product to use.

Not only a 'project' which - say - only developers enjoy.  And TDF - as
a body - should be able to 'complain' at eco-system partners introducing
to many new bugs, without carrying enough to solve them.
Currently eco-system partners 'care only about bugs their customers care
about' so every flaw they introduce but outside that scope while likely
linger around.
Of course is this a 'simplification' and put harshly. The reality is
more defuse, multilayered and complex. If somebody introduces QR
feature, rendered as SVG. And it doesn't export well to DOCX.
Who did it? SVG broken by someone else (or never worked before). Is the
company supposed to fix that on their budget? Even if this isn't a need
for the customer who liked they QR feature?
If LibreOffice at TDF simply a pipe for code flow across. No problem. If
LibreOffice at TDF also stands for quality product, this might tends to
an issue. And maybe even TDF should (financially contribute)
to solve it? Of should we wait until a customer appears at who needs QR
codes at DOCX export? This would imply a fresh supply of money, instead
of consuming TDF or company budget.
And the dilemma's are born :-).
Result is LibreOffice at TDF riddled with bugs waiting for a customer to
be paid for :-). Instead of eco-system partners investing upfront (and
asking a higher price for their product; as more feature complete)
They actually can't do that, because the don't get a proper return on
investment. Because there work is immediately also found in LibreOffice
at TDF (which can be downloaded for free). And has the same stuff :-(
So TDF has to invest, is in principle possible. Now the problem moves to
TDF. How can TDF by financial self sufficient over the long term? They
donations are nice, but likely not enough.

The community appears to be 'working' - being in silent agreement -
until a topic is on the table which hurts the balance. The cracks in
burst within the "community" become visible.
It keeps surprising me how people managed to work with this for such a
long time ;-).

The whole point is nobody has a clue what LibreOffice at TDF exactly
stands for. So everybody is reading their story into it.
They eco-system partners use TDF as pipe to share code and use
LibreOffice is a 'testing ground'. To get their product tested until
proven secure enough for Enterprise environments.
In this vision/model QA is by volunteers is pretty cheap replacement for
QA done by eco-system partners themselves with paid employees.
They won't say that out loud, duh!

And members would LibreOffice at TDF to rock. However if LibreOffice
becomes to good, what's the remaining proposition for the eco-system
partners?
The must compete with a rocking LibreOffice supplied by TDF. So I
sometimes suspect reason keep it broken. Not saying this actually the
case! I simply don't know.

> needs to message in a clearer way on the website as to its definition of
> "community", just to make it crystal clear. We all come from different
> cultures, I am Canadian, and in particular French-Canadian, so, my
> interpretation of "community" will be nuanced by my cultural background.
> However, if a clear definition on the TDF and LibreOffice offers a clear
> message of the definition of "community" then it can be treated as our
> reference-guide.
I assume we have the same interpretation of community (except in the
Western individualistic society) this might differ from expression of
community in Asia.
Most of us pretty outspoken (and direct about how we see thing). So we
might less inclined to make sacrifices to for the great good of the
community.
Hierarchy pretty important in Japan. Disagreeing openly pretty
disrespectful. This behavior would make  job at BoD at TDF a lot easier.
However maybe wrong decisions are made in Japan (because boss always
right). Or their more sabotaging going on. But not a cultural expert and
no real life experiences.
So stereotypes, hear say and such..

The major concern is that I'm missing a coherent, consistent community.
A unity. Only fractions of people working together as far as the common
interest goes.
However everybody has it's own agenda, motivation, goals and ambitions. 
I'm doing QA for TDF for fun and in they interest of they users of
LibreOffice TDF edition.
That they eco-system partners also profiting from it fine.  I prefer not
to see myself as an unpaid employee; extension of they eco-system
partners company. In that case I'm feeling used.

I personally prefer more of a focus on user experience/ product
quality.  Even if this include bugs which less of an concern of they
eco-system partners (as their customers don't care for whatever reason).
I still assume those would benefit too, except the economic cost/benefit
ratio doesn't add up in they eco-system partners calculations (which is
in their right). But I sometimes would like TDF making a stance,
that get it done anyhow. With stick (pushing/demanding) & carrot
(money). Say TDF being a 'force' of influence. Currently it's slightly
to cosy integration between TDF and eco-system partners at the top.
Catering the needs of eco-system partners (they eco-system partners
might disagree ;-). It's my impression.. Could be wrong. And of course,
eco-system partners are important.
So I see LibreOffice at TDF as a separate entity with it's a separate
purpose/ values (however I don't have clear picture here)

I also don't have feeling of 'belonging' to the LibreOffice community,
even being a member and around for a long time. But I'm only a newbie,
compared with they long term members.
Yes, I do participate and I think I get along pretty well (even being a
pain in the ass once in a while). But to say their is a shared common
(aligned) interest..

They community doesn't exist (currently) and/or isn't harmonic ;-).
Which makes Community Edition bit ironic.  It's a pretty special
interpretation of community, IMHO
I would use a description with less connotations free: a group of people
working together on the same project for various reasons and interests.
FWIW: I'm only single voice, so maybe just me.
Note: I do see marketing presenting/ picturing LibreOffice as a
community; and that's they formal narrative. It's actually far more
complicated in reality. This of course my perception.

Cheers,
Telesto


--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: [hidden email]
Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: https://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/marketing/
Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy
Michael Weghorn Michael Weghorn
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: The Edition Matter

In reply to this post by Telesto
On 12/10/2020 23:30, Telesto wrote:

>     Some attempts:
>     LibreOffice shipped by TDF.
>     LibreOffice TDF release.
>     LibreOffice distributed/compiled by TDF.
>     LibreOffice made possible by TDF.
>

If "no label is not an option" (as stated by Italo), I'd currently
prefer something like "TDF Edition" over "Personal Edition" or
"Community Edition" as well, given the negative/misleading connotations
the latter may result in.
More meaningful suggestions welcome, of course. :-)

On Tue, 13 Oct 2020 09:57:25 +0200, Mike Saunders wrote:
>
> The logo already has "The Document Foundation" underneath, so I don't
> think this really adds anything. And just leads people to wonder what
> that actually means. I think a word like "Community" makes it more clear
> that it's not an enterprise product.
>
> Just my 2C...

An accompanying note in the About dialog that professional support or
Enterprise editions are available might clarify this.
Whether such a note would be enough or the "TDF Edition" label would
still add much to that is actually unclear to me as well, though.

Michael

--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: [hidden email]
Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: https://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/marketing/
Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy
kainz.a kainz.a
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: The Edition Matter

LibreOffice Community Project
LibreOffice Enterprise by CIB
LibreOffice Enterprise by Collabora
LibreOffice Enterprise by ...

Personal Edition has the feeling of, not allowed somewhere (in the office)
Community vs Enterprise Edition has the feeling of, Enterprise is better
Community Project gives me the feeling that you can join. What should be
the idea behind LibO and TDF. There was also this discussion about Project
vs. Product which is more clear.

It would be glad if ReadHat as they support the development work of LibO
can ship a edition like:
LibreOffice Enterprise by ReadHat


Am Di., 20. Okt. 2020 um 10:52 Uhr schrieb Michael Weghorn <
[hidden email]>:

> On 12/10/2020 23:30, Telesto wrote:
>
> >     Some attempts:
> >     LibreOffice shipped by TDF.
> >     LibreOffice TDF release.
> >     LibreOffice distributed/compiled by TDF.
> >     LibreOffice made possible by TDF.
> >
>
> If "no label is not an option" (as stated by Italo), I'd currently
> prefer something like "TDF Edition" over "Personal Edition" or
> "Community Edition" as well, given the negative/misleading connotations
> the latter may result in.
> More meaningful suggestions welcome, of course. :-)
>
> On Tue, 13 Oct 2020 09:57:25 +0200, Mike Saunders wrote:
> >
> > The logo already has "The Document Foundation" underneath, so I don't
> > think this really adds anything. And just leads people to wonder what
> > that actually means. I think a word like "Community" makes it more clear
> > that it's not an enterprise product.
> >
> > Just my 2C...
>
> An accompanying note in the About dialog that professional support or
> Enterprise editions are available might clarify this.
> Whether such a note would be enough or the "TDF Edition" label would
> still add much to that is actually unclear to me as well, though.
>
> Michael
>
> --
> To unsubscribe e-mail to: [hidden email]
> Problems?
> https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
> Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
> List archive: https://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/marketing/
> Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy
>

--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: [hidden email]
Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: https://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/marketing/
Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy
toki-2 toki-2
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: The Edition Matter

On 2020/10/20 09:18, kainz.a wrote:

> It would be glad if ReadHat as they support the development work of LibO
> can ship a edition like:
> LibreOffice Enterprise by ReadHat

Some of the third party vendors that provide paid support, do have a
line along those lines, in the about screen of their edition.

One vendor provided a phone number, with the notation that all calls to
that number resulted in a charge to their phone, for the paid support
that it provided, in the about screen of their edition.

###

I understand the position of the third party vendors that want/need
enterprise level clients. However, going forward, it is the SOHOs that
will want desktop support for LibreOffice, etc.
Unfortunately, 10 seats and profit are, for enterprise focused support
vendors, mutually exclusive concepts.

Virtually every organisation with more than 10 seats, either has, or is
going to switch to Office365, or a competitor.
TLAs might not go cloud only, but the odds of them outsourcing office
support is minimal.
FWIW, the last time I tried a Linux spin that was produced by a TLA, it
had done some major customization of LibreOffice --- to the point that
the support would be pretty much only available from the TLA that
produced it.
(An oddity about the US, is that the TLAs seem to be required to
distributed their private Linux spins, on a website available to the
general public.)

###

^1: If an enterprise focused Support Vendor can place Tier 1 support in
a call centre in Namibia, or another country with a low cost of living,
then 5 seat SOHO support might be profitable. (Namibia has the virtue of
L1 speakers of both English and, and with roughly 3 months training, L2
Dutch speakers. L2 French, Italian, Portuguese, and Italian speakers
requires roughly five months of training. (This is from a call centre in
either Walvis Baai, or Windhoek, that was trying to persuade me to use
their services.)
I don't know the current laws related to 900# service in North America,
or if something similar is available in other countries. That is paid
support route that could be looked into. (From my perspective, the worst
case scenario is when somebody sends a message to one of the mailing
lists, or ask-bot, a reply to the effect of, "Please call 900-555-1212
for paid support. That phone call will cost you US$25.00 + US$2.00/minute.)

jonathon

--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: [hidden email]
Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: https://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/marketing/
Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy
Uwe Altmann Uwe Altmann
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: The Edition Matter

In reply to this post by Michael Weghorn
Hi

Am 20.10.20 um 10:50 schrieb Michael Weghorn:

> If "no label is not an option" (as stated by Italo), I'd currently
> prefer something like "TDF Edition" over "Personal Edition" or
> "Community Edition" as well, given the negative/misleading connotations
> the latter may result in.

"no label is not an option" is Italos and some others persons working on this (professional as I have to admit) opinion. But cof ourse "no label" is still an option - no decision made yet.
IMHO no label is the preferred option (as stated in past). So my solution would be:

> LibreOffice
for the (vanilla) binaries delivered by the TDF.

Downstream products using the Trademark have to add an qualifier like:
> LibreOffice Enterprise by CIB
> LibreOffice Enterprise by Collabora
> LibreOffice Enterprise by ...
or:
LibeOfficeOnline by Collabora...

or may use the "LibreOffice Technology"-Label like
Collabora Office for Android - using LibreOffice Technology

The latter one beeing voluntary because our license allows something like "Collabora Office" even if 99% of the code is LibreOffice.
--
Mit freundlichen Grüßen
Uwe Altmann

--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: [hidden email]
Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: https://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/marketing/
Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy
Uwe Altmann Uwe Altmann
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: The Edition Matter

In reply to this post by Michael Weghorn
Hi

Am 20.10.20 um 10:50 schrieb Michael Weghorn:

> If "no label is not an option" (as stated by Italo), I'd currently
> prefer something like "TDF Edition" over "Personal Edition" or
> "Community Edition" as well, given the negative/misleading connotations
> the latter may result in.

"no label is not an option" is Italos and some others - professional as I have to admit - option. But "no label" also still is an option - no decision made yet.

And imho no label is the preferred option (as stated in past). So my solution would be:

> LibreOffice
for all the (vanilla) binaries delivered by the TDF.

Downstream products using the LibreOffice-trademark have to add an descriptor like:
> LibreOffice Enterprise by CIB
> LibreOffice Enterprise by Collabora
> LibreOffice Enterprise by ...
or
LibeOfficeOnline by Collabora...

The "LibreOffice Technology" may be used voluntary in a way like "Collabora Office using LibreOffice Technology".

This is voluntary because our license allows something like "Collabora Office" even if 99% of the code is LibreOffice.
--
Mit freundlichen Grüßen
Uwe Altmann

--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: [hidden email]
Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: https://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/marketing/
Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy
Justin Luth-2 Justin Luth-2
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: The Edition Matter

+1 to what Uwe and Michael and Telesto have been saying.

Personal / Community are not accurate labels because they imply missing
features. LibreOffice as we currently know it is full featured. By
introducing these labels, you are signaling an intent to "dumb down"
LibreOffice.

The current real distinction is around support.  So, using Linux
terminology, a more accurate label would be LibreOffice Rolling verses
LibreOffice LTS.  But that is geeky terminology, so for that reason it
probably isn't appropriate.

Therefore since none of the suggested labels properly convey meaning, I
too prefer the supposedly unavailable "no label" solution for TDF builds.

Justin


On 10/21/20 11:52 AM, Uwe Altmann wrote:

> Hi
>
> Am 20.10.20 um 10:50 schrieb Michael Weghorn:
>
>> If "no label is not an option" (as stated by Italo), I'd currently
>> prefer something like "TDF Edition" over "Personal Edition" or
>> "Community Edition" as well, given the negative/misleading connotations
>> the latter may result in.
> "no label is not an option" is Italos and some others - professional as I have to admit - option. But "no label" also still is an option - no decision made yet.
>
> And imho no label is the preferred option (as stated in past).
> Uwe Altmann
>

--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: [hidden email]
Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: https://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/marketing/
Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy
marcpare4 marcpare4
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: The Edition Matter

Perhaps Italo could chime in and inform us if having "no label is not an
option". We have to be consistent in a marketing plan, whether short or
long-term.

But, for me, the preference would be to continue with no label if this
is an option, however, if a label is needed, "Community Edition" is what
I would prefer. From my perspective, there is no negative connotation,
the public will get exactly what it is, a version of LibreOffice built
by members of the volunteer community and used by the members of the
TDF/LibreOffice. I don't believe that new-comers to LibreOffice site
will see the "LibreOffice Community Edition" as a negative, as long as
our website messaging is clear on the TDF and LibreOffice Mission
Statements.

As for any commercial versions of LibreOffice, then "Powered by" is
still my preferred, regardless of any community label.

But, really, Italo should chime in and set us straight, again, and
inform us if going with no label is an option. There is nothing wrong
with going back on a marketing plan, but as long as we are being
consistent in our planning discussions. More members need to chime in on
this important discussion ... I am surprised that non of the board
members nor any of the implicated commercially-connected members are not
participating in this discussion that was called by Italo. Especially
when Italo has set a deadline date for the discussion and then
membership vote. More members need to be informed that this discussion
is taking place; just so that the membership all get to have their say.

Marc

Le 2020-10-23 à 07 h 40, Justin Luth a écrit :

> +1 to what Uwe and Michael and Telesto have been saying.
>
> Personal / Community are not accurate labels because they imply
> missing features. LibreOffice as we currently know it is full
> featured. By introducing these labels, you are signaling an intent to
> "dumb down" LibreOffice.
>
> The current real distinction is around support.  So, using Linux
> terminology, a more accurate label would be LibreOffice Rolling verses
> LibreOffice LTS.  But that is geeky terminology, so for that reason it
> probably isn't appropriate.
>
> Therefore since none of the suggested labels properly convey meaning,
> I too prefer the supposedly unavailable "no label" solution for TDF
> builds.
>
> Justin
>
>
> On 10/21/20 11:52 AM, Uwe Altmann wrote:
>> Hi
>>
>> Am 20.10.20 um 10:50 schrieb Michael Weghorn:
>>
>>> If "no label is not an option" (as stated by Italo), I'd currently
>>> prefer something like "TDF Edition" over "Personal Edition" or
>>> "Community Edition" as well, given the negative/misleading connotations
>>> the latter may result in.
>> "no label is not an option" is Italos and some others - professional
>> as I have to admit - option. But "no label" also still is an option -
>> no decision made yet.
>>
>> And imho no label is the preferred option (as stated in past).
>> Uwe Altmann
>>
>


--
Marc Paré
[hidden email]
https://www.parEntreprise.com
parEntreprise.com Supports OpenDocument Formats (ODF)
parEntreprise.com Supports http://www.LibreOffice.org
LibreOffice Office Suite - 200 million users and growing!
Over 1,000 project developers with impeccable help from its user base.



--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: [hidden email]
Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: https://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/marketing/
Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy
Simon Phipps Simon Phipps
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: The Edition Matter

Taking on board all the concerns about not giving the impression of a
weaker version, and if "no label" is really not an option, how about
calling TDF's package "official edition"?

S.

On Fri, 23 Oct 2020, 14:31 Marc Paré, <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Perhaps Italo could chime in and inform us if having "no label is not an
> option". We have to be consistent in a marketing plan, whether short or
> long-term.
>
> But, for me, the preference would be to continue with no label if this
> is an option, however, if a label is needed, "Community Edition" is what
> I would prefer. From my perspective, there is no negative connotation,
> the public will get exactly what it is, a version of LibreOffice built
> by members of the volunteer community and used by the members of the
> TDF/LibreOffice. I don't believe that new-comers to LibreOffice site
> will see the "LibreOffice Community Edition" as a negative, as long as
> our website messaging is clear on the TDF and LibreOffice Mission
> Statements.
>
> As for any commercial versions of LibreOffice, then "Powered by" is
> still my preferred, regardless of any community label.
>
> But, really, Italo should chime in and set us straight, again, and
> inform us if going with no label is an option. There is nothing wrong
> with going back on a marketing plan, but as long as we are being
> consistent in our planning discussions. More members need to chime in on
> this important discussion ... I am surprised that non of the board
> members nor any of the implicated commercially-connected members are not
> participating in this discussion that was called by Italo. Especially
> when Italo has set a deadline date for the discussion and then
> membership vote. More members need to be informed that this discussion
> is taking place; just so that the membership all get to have their say.
>
> Marc
>
> Le 2020-10-23 à 07 h 40, Justin Luth a écrit :
> > +1 to what Uwe and Michael and Telesto have been saying.
> >
> > Personal / Community are not accurate labels because they imply
> > missing features. LibreOffice as we currently know it is full
> > featured. By introducing these labels, you are signaling an intent to
> > "dumb down" LibreOffice.
> >
> > The current real distinction is around support.  So, using Linux
> > terminology, a more accurate label would be LibreOffice Rolling verses
> > LibreOffice LTS.  But that is geeky terminology, so for that reason it
> > probably isn't appropriate.
> >
> > Therefore since none of the suggested labels properly convey meaning,
> > I too prefer the supposedly unavailable "no label" solution for TDF
> > builds.
> >
> > Justin
> >
> >
> > On 10/21/20 11:52 AM, Uwe Altmann wrote:
> >> Hi
> >>
> >> Am 20.10.20 um 10:50 schrieb Michael Weghorn:
> >>
> >>> If "no label is not an option" (as stated by Italo), I'd currently
> >>> prefer something like "TDF Edition" over "Personal Edition" or
> >>> "Community Edition" as well, given the negative/misleading connotations
> >>> the latter may result in.
> >> "no label is not an option" is Italos and some others - professional
> >> as I have to admit - option. But "no label" also still is an option -
> >> no decision made yet.
> >>
> >> And imho no label is the preferred option (as stated in past).
> >> Uwe Altmann
> >>
> >
>
>
> --
> Marc Paré
> [hidden email]
> https://www.parEntreprise.com
> parEntreprise.com Supports OpenDocument Formats (ODF)
> parEntreprise.com Supports http://www.LibreOffice.org
> LibreOffice Office Suite - 200 million users and growing!
> Over 1,000 project developers with impeccable help from its user base.
>
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe e-mail to: [hidden email]
> Problems?
> https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
> Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
> List archive: https://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/marketing/
> Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy
>

--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: [hidden email]
Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: https://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/marketing/
Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy
Nigel Verity Nigel Verity
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: The Edition Matter

Doesn't this imply there are some unofficial and, thereby, untrustworthy editions in circulation?

Nige

> On 23 Oct 2020, at 06:44, Simon Phipps <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Taking on board all the concerns about not giving the impression of a
> weaker version, and if "no label" is really not an option, how about
> calling TDF's package "official edition"?
>
> S.
>
>> On Fri, 23 Oct 2020, 14:31 Marc Paré, <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> Perhaps Italo could chime in and inform us if having "no label is not an
>> option". We have to be consistent in a marketing plan, whether short or
>> long-term.
>>
>> But, for me, the preference would be to continue with no label if this
>> is an option, however, if a label is needed, "Community Edition" is what
>> I would prefer. From my perspective, there is no negative connotation,
>> the public will get exactly what it is, a version of LibreOffice built
>> by members of the volunteer community and used by the members of the
>> TDF/LibreOffice. I don't believe that new-comers to LibreOffice site
>> will see the "LibreOffice Community Edition" as a negative, as long as
>> our website messaging is clear on the TDF and LibreOffice Mission
>> Statements.
>>
>> As for any commercial versions of LibreOffice, then "Powered by" is
>> still my preferred, regardless of any community label.
>>
>> But, really, Italo should chime in and set us straight, again, and
>> inform us if going with no label is an option. There is nothing wrong
>> with going back on a marketing plan, but as long as we are being
>> consistent in our planning discussions. More members need to chime in on
>> this important discussion ... I am surprised that non of the board
>> members nor any of the implicated commercially-connected members are not
>> participating in this discussion that was called by Italo. Especially
>> when Italo has set a deadline date for the discussion and then
>> membership vote. More members need to be informed that this discussion
>> is taking place; just so that the membership all get to have their say.
>>
>> Marc
>>
>>> Le 2020-10-23 à 07 h 40, Justin Luth a écrit :
>>> +1 to what Uwe and Michael and Telesto have been saying.
>>>
>>> Personal / Community are not accurate labels because they imply
>>> missing features. LibreOffice as we currently know it is full
>>> featured. By introducing these labels, you are signaling an intent to
>>> "dumb down" LibreOffice.
>>>
>>> The current real distinction is around support.  So, using Linux
>>> terminology, a more accurate label would be LibreOffice Rolling verses
>>> LibreOffice LTS.  But that is geeky terminology, so for that reason it
>>> probably isn't appropriate.
>>>
>>> Therefore since none of the suggested labels properly convey meaning,
>>> I too prefer the supposedly unavailable "no label" solution for TDF
>>> builds.
>>>
>>> Justin
>>>
>>>
>>>> On 10/21/20 11:52 AM, Uwe Altmann wrote:
>>>> Hi
>>>>
>>>>> Am 20.10.20 um 10:50 schrieb Michael Weghorn:
>>>>>
>>>>> If "no label is not an option" (as stated by Italo), I'd currently
>>>>> prefer something like "TDF Edition" over "Personal Edition" or
>>>>> "Community Edition" as well, given the negative/misleading connotations
>>>>> the latter may result in.
>>>> "no label is not an option" is Italos and some others - professional
>>>> as I have to admit - option. But "no label" also still is an option -
>>>> no decision made yet.
>>>>
>>>> And imho no label is the preferred option (as stated in past).
>>>> Uwe Altmann
>>
>>
>> --
>> Marc Paré
>> [hidden email]
>> https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.parentreprise.com%2F&amp;data=04%7C01%7C%7C9f6b42654f164356111908d87759d3c7%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637390574974336407%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&amp;sdata=EtMLvTjpe9e7FKAGYTbzeamR4KpjVEBQNSR4ZTNdv3Y%3D&amp;reserved=0
>> parEntreprise.com Supports OpenDocument Formats (ODF)
>> parEntreprise.com Supports https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.libreoffice.org%2F&amp;data=04%7C01%7C%7C9f6b42654f164356111908d87759d3c7%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637390574974346401%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&amp;sdata=eaAk5FHyJGrGoLdzVekvUkDZbeiDxm1mzOWluyGaA14%3D&amp;reserved=0
>> LibreOffice Office Suite - 200 million users and growing!
>> Over 1,000 project developers with impeccable help from its user base.
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> To unsubscribe e-mail to: [hidden email]
>> Problems?
>> https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.libreoffice.org%2Fget-help%2Fmailing-lists%2Fhow-to-unsubscribe%2F&amp;data=04%7C01%7C%7C9f6b42654f164356111908d87759d3c7%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637390574974346401%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&amp;sdata=TiO2o0ctAK2s78cV45At%2FbapI6cFZgmEoAdWkVAUbRs%3D&amp;reserved=0
>> Posting guidelines + more: https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwiki.documentfoundation.org%2FNetiquette&amp;data=04%7C01%7C%7C9f6b42654f164356111908d87759d3c7%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637390574974346401%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&amp;sdata=X5lvlUw0P7cEg%2FmUFU7IsDHXPY9ms%2Fi0U%2BeD1KfnLsQ%3D&amp;reserved=0
>> List archive: https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flistarchives.libreoffice.org%2Fglobal%2Fmarketing%2F&amp;data=04%7C01%7C%7C9f6b42654f164356111908d87759d3c7%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637390574974346401%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&amp;sdata=5g8zhHeRt0myTmFgAPYg%2BJEVvxqlIYs52smOhi8xUQ0%3D&amp;reserved=0
>> Privacy Policy: https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.documentfoundation.org%2Fprivacy&amp;data=04%7C01%7C%7C9f6b42654f164356111908d87759d3c7%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637390574974346401%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&amp;sdata=B3rpk2yley8F8DlMdIF2AdpKb4uhftnXnm1eRA%2FvKpc%3D&amp;reserved=0
>
> --
> To unsubscribe e-mail to: [hidden email]
> Problems? https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.libreoffice.org%2Fget-help%2Fmailing-lists%2Fhow-to-unsubscribe%2F&amp;data=04%7C01%7C%7C9f6b42654f164356111908d87759d3c7%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637390574974346401%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&amp;sdata=TiO2o0ctAK2s78cV45At%2FbapI6cFZgmEoAdWkVAUbRs%3D&amp;reserved=0
> Posting guidelines + more: https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwiki.documentfoundation.org%2FNetiquette&amp;data=04%7C01%7C%7C9f6b42654f164356111908d87759d3c7%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637390574974346401%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&amp;sdata=X5lvlUw0P7cEg%2FmUFU7IsDHXPY9ms%2Fi0U%2BeD1KfnLsQ%3D&amp;reserved=0
> List archive: https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flistarchives.libreoffice.org%2Fglobal%2Fmarketing%2F&amp;data=04%7C01%7C%7C9f6b42654f164356111908d87759d3c7%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637390574974346401%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&amp;sdata=5g8zhHeRt0myTmFgAPYg%2BJEVvxqlIYs52smOhi8xUQ0%3D&amp;reserved=0
> Privacy Policy: https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.documentfoundation.org%2Fprivacy&amp;data=04%7C01%7C%7C9f6b42654f164356111908d87759d3c7%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637390574974346401%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&amp;sdata=B3rpk2yley8F8DlMdIF2AdpKb4uhftnXnm1eRA%2FvKpc%3D&amp;reserved=0

--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: [hidden email]
Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: https://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/marketing/
Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy
Next » 12