You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@openoffice.apache.org by Peter Kovacs <pe...@posteo.de> on 2025/11/21 13:44:42 UTC
Description
Haven't we decided to change the description for Apache OpenOffice.
I found this old description here. Where is the new one? I would fix it in the next days.
<https://www.openoffice.org/why/index.html>
All the best
Peter
Re: Description
Posted by Matthias Seidel <ma...@hamburg.de>.
Am 24.11.25 um 23:35 schrieb Marcus:
> Am 23.11.25 um 18:07 schrieb Matthias Seidel:
>> Am 23.11.25 um 14:39 schrieb Matthias Seidel:
>>> Am 23.11.25 um 14:16 schrieb Marcus:
>>>> Am 22.11.25 um 19:08 schrieb Damjan Jovanovic:
>>>>> On Sat, Nov 22, 2025 at 1:10 PM <ap...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>> Am 22.11.2025 um 10:32 schrieb Marcus:
>>>>>>> Am 21.11.25 um 14:44 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
>>>>>>>> Haven't we decided to change the description for Apache
>>>>>>>> OpenOffice.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I found this old description here. Where is the new one? I
>>>>>>>> would fix
>>>>>>>> it in the next days.
>>>>>>>> <https://www.openoffice.org/why/index.html>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> do you have a pointer where / when we have discussed this?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sadly not really. It was years ago. Maybe it was a discussion
>>>>>> within the
>>>>>> pmc and never on dev as I do now.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But maybe we can discuss again. The following statement seems a
>>>>>> bit bold
>>>>>> for us.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Apache OpenOffice is the leading *open-source* *office
>>>>>> software
>>>>>> suite* for *word processing*, *spreadsheets*, *presentations*, *
>>>>>> graphics*, *databases* and more.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Is this something we want to battle for? Or do we want to go with a
>>>>>> different statement, that reflects more what we are after?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Leading reflects innovation, bleeding edge. We should think then
>>>>>> on AI
>>>>>> support and other technologies. A lot of people do not feel home
>>>>>> in our
>>>>>> UI, because we do not follow the closed source market leader.
>>>>>> If you check what low code systems do at the moment in terms of
>>>>>> databases we are not offering a tool at this point that is at the
>>>>>> edge
>>>>>> of today's representation.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I wonder if we should maybe change this to something that
>>>>>> reflects more
>>>>>> what we are after. IMHO these are traits like:
>>>>>> - Preserving skill
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - offering a free Version for the public good, with low
>>>>>> accessability
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - The ability to run on a broad support list not only market
>>>>>> supported
>>>>>> machines.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> That sounds too negative!
>>>>>
>>>>> We are also under a more permissive license than LO, allowing our
>>>>> code to
>>>>> be reused and extended by other parties, even commercially.
>>>>>
>>>>> We support several file formats better than other open-source office
>>>>> suites, eg. the MS Office 2003 XML formats which I've fixed many
>>>>> bugs in
>>>>> recently.
>>>>>
>>>>> We don't have community editions or bug users to donate.
>>>>
>>>> same for me. I don't see a big need to re-word all that text.
>>>>
>>>> Maybe we can change it to "Apache OpenOffice is one of the leading
>>>> open-source office software suite for ...". But that's all it would
>>>> do.
>>>
>>> +1
>>>
>>> We already changed the description (the leading -> a leading) in our
>>> DOAP:
>>>
>>> https://projects.apache.org/project.html?openoffice
>>>
>>> We should change it accordingly on our website.
>>
>> Done now.
>
> thanks for the fast change.
No problem. This is just a small fix to unify he statement.
Of course we could work further on it, but that would also need
translation efforts.
Regards,
Matthias
>
> Marcus
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Description
Posted by Marcus <ma...@wtnet.de>.
Am 23.11.25 um 18:07 schrieb Matthias Seidel:
> Am 23.11.25 um 14:39 schrieb Matthias Seidel:
>> Am 23.11.25 um 14:16 schrieb Marcus:
>>> Am 22.11.25 um 19:08 schrieb Damjan Jovanovic:
>>>> On Sat, Nov 22, 2025 at 1:10 PM <ap...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>> Am 22.11.2025 um 10:32 schrieb Marcus:
>>>>>> Am 21.11.25 um 14:44 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
>>>>>>> Haven't we decided to change the description for Apache OpenOffice.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I found this old description here. Where is the new one? I would fix
>>>>>>> it in the next days.
>>>>>>> <https://www.openoffice.org/why/index.html>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> do you have a pointer where / when we have discussed this?
>>>>>
>>>>> Sadly not really. It was years ago. Maybe it was a discussion
>>>>> within the
>>>>> pmc and never on dev as I do now.
>>>>>
>>>>> But maybe we can discuss again. The following statement seems a bit
>>>>> bold
>>>>> for us.
>>>>>
>>>>> Apache OpenOffice is the leading *open-source* *office
>>>>> software
>>>>> suite* for *word processing*, *spreadsheets*, *presentations*, *
>>>>> graphics*, *databases* and more.
>>>>>
>>>>> Is this something we want to battle for? Or do we want to go with a
>>>>> different statement, that reflects more what we are after?
>>>>>
>>>>> Leading reflects innovation, bleeding edge. We should think then on AI
>>>>> support and other technologies. A lot of people do not feel home in
>>>>> our
>>>>> UI, because we do not follow the closed source market leader.
>>>>> If you check what low code systems do at the moment in terms of
>>>>> databases we are not offering a tool at this point that is at the edge
>>>>> of today's representation.
>>>>>
>>>>> I wonder if we should maybe change this to something that reflects
>>>>> more
>>>>> what we are after. IMHO these are traits like:
>>>>> - Preserving skill
>>>>>
>>>>> - offering a free Version for the public good, with low accessability
>>>>>
>>>>> - The ability to run on a broad support list not only market supported
>>>>> machines.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> That sounds too negative!
>>>>
>>>> We are also under a more permissive license than LO, allowing our
>>>> code to
>>>> be reused and extended by other parties, even commercially.
>>>>
>>>> We support several file formats better than other open-source office
>>>> suites, eg. the MS Office 2003 XML formats which I've fixed many
>>>> bugs in
>>>> recently.
>>>>
>>>> We don't have community editions or bug users to donate.
>>>
>>> same for me. I don't see a big need to re-word all that text.
>>>
>>> Maybe we can change it to "Apache OpenOffice is one of the leading
>>> open-source office software suite for ...". But that's all it would do.
>>
>> +1
>>
>> We already changed the description (the leading -> a leading) in our
>> DOAP:
>>
>> https://projects.apache.org/project.html?openoffice
>>
>> We should change it accordingly on our website.
>
> Done now.
thanks for the fast change.
Marcus
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Description
Posted by Matthias Seidel <ma...@hamburg.de>.
Am 23.11.25 um 14:39 schrieb Matthias Seidel:
> Hi,
>
> Am 23.11.25 um 14:16 schrieb Marcus:
>> Am 22.11.25 um 19:08 schrieb Damjan Jovanovic:
>>> On Sat, Nov 22, 2025 at 1:10 PM <ap...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>> Am 22.11.2025 um 10:32 schrieb Marcus:
>>>>> Am 21.11.25 um 14:44 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
>>>>>> Haven't we decided to change the description for Apache OpenOffice.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I found this old description here. Where is the new one? I would fix
>>>>>> it in the next days.
>>>>>> <https://www.openoffice.org/why/index.html>
>>>>>
>>>>> do you have a pointer where / when we have discussed this?
>>>>
>>>> Sadly not really. It was years ago. Maybe it was a discussion
>>>> within the
>>>> pmc and never on dev as I do now.
>>>>
>>>> But maybe we can discuss again. The following statement seems a bit
>>>> bold
>>>> for us.
>>>>
>>>> Apache OpenOffice is the leading *open-source* *office
>>>> software
>>>> suite* for *word processing*, *spreadsheets*, *presentations*, *
>>>> graphics*, *databases* and more.
>>>>
>>>> Is this something we want to battle for? Or do we want to go with a
>>>> different statement, that reflects more what we are after?
>>>>
>>>> Leading reflects innovation, bleeding edge. We should think then on AI
>>>> support and other technologies. A lot of people do not feel home in
>>>> our
>>>> UI, because we do not follow the closed source market leader.
>>>> If you check what low code systems do at the moment in terms of
>>>> databases we are not offering a tool at this point that is at the edge
>>>> of today's representation.
>>>>
>>>> I wonder if we should maybe change this to something that reflects
>>>> more
>>>> what we are after. IMHO these are traits like:
>>>> - Preserving skill
>>>>
>>>> - offering a free Version for the public good, with low accessability
>>>>
>>>> - The ability to run on a broad support list not only market supported
>>>> machines.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> That sounds too negative!
>>>
>>> We are also under a more permissive license than LO, allowing our
>>> code to
>>> be reused and extended by other parties, even commercially.
>>>
>>> We support several file formats better than other open-source office
>>> suites, eg. the MS Office 2003 XML formats which I've fixed many
>>> bugs in
>>> recently.
>>>
>>> We don't have community editions or bug users to donate.
>>
>> same for me. I don't see a big need to re-word all that text.
>>
>> Maybe we can change it to "Apache OpenOffice is one of the leading
>> open-source office software suite for ...". But that's all it would do.
>
> +1
>
> We already changed the description (the leading -> a leading) in our
> DOAP:
>
> https://projects.apache.org/project.html?openoffice
>
> We should change it accordingly on our website.
Done now.
Matthias
>
> Matthias
>
>>
>> Marcus
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Description
Posted by Matthias Seidel <ma...@hamburg.de>.
Hi,
Am 23.11.25 um 14:16 schrieb Marcus:
> Am 22.11.25 um 19:08 schrieb Damjan Jovanovic:
>> On Sat, Nov 22, 2025 at 1:10 PM <ap...@apache.org> wrote:
>>> Am 22.11.2025 um 10:32 schrieb Marcus:
>>>> Am 21.11.25 um 14:44 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
>>>>> Haven't we decided to change the description for Apache OpenOffice.
>>>>>
>>>>> I found this old description here. Where is the new one? I would fix
>>>>> it in the next days.
>>>>> <https://www.openoffice.org/why/index.html>
>>>>
>>>> do you have a pointer where / when we have discussed this?
>>>
>>> Sadly not really. It was years ago. Maybe it was a discussion within
>>> the
>>> pmc and never on dev as I do now.
>>>
>>> But maybe we can discuss again. The following statement seems a bit
>>> bold
>>> for us.
>>>
>>> Apache OpenOffice is the leading *open-source* *office software
>>> suite* for *word processing*, *spreadsheets*, *presentations*, *
>>> graphics*, *databases* and more.
>>>
>>> Is this something we want to battle for? Or do we want to go with a
>>> different statement, that reflects more what we are after?
>>>
>>> Leading reflects innovation, bleeding edge. We should think then on AI
>>> support and other technologies. A lot of people do not feel home in our
>>> UI, because we do not follow the closed source market leader.
>>> If you check what low code systems do at the moment in terms of
>>> databases we are not offering a tool at this point that is at the edge
>>> of today's representation.
>>>
>>> I wonder if we should maybe change this to something that reflects more
>>> what we are after. IMHO these are traits like:
>>> - Preserving skill
>>>
>>> - offering a free Version for the public good, with low accessability
>>>
>>> - The ability to run on a broad support list not only market supported
>>> machines.
>>>
>>>
>> That sounds too negative!
>>
>> We are also under a more permissive license than LO, allowing our
>> code to
>> be reused and extended by other parties, even commercially.
>>
>> We support several file formats better than other open-source office
>> suites, eg. the MS Office 2003 XML formats which I've fixed many bugs in
>> recently.
>>
>> We don't have community editions or bug users to donate.
>
> same for me. I don't see a big need to re-word all that text.
>
> Maybe we can change it to "Apache OpenOffice is one of the leading
> open-source office software suite for ...". But that's all it would do.
+1
We already changed the description (the leading -> a leading) in our DOAP:
https://projects.apache.org/project.html?openoffice
We should change it accordingly on our website.
Matthias
>
> Marcus
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Description
Posted by Marcus <ma...@wtnet.de>.
Am 22.11.25 um 19:08 schrieb Damjan Jovanovic:
> On Sat, Nov 22, 2025 at 1:10 PM <ap...@apache.org> wrote:
>> Am 22.11.2025 um 10:32 schrieb Marcus:
>>> Am 21.11.25 um 14:44 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
>>>> Haven't we decided to change the description for Apache OpenOffice.
>>>>
>>>> I found this old description here. Where is the new one? I would fix
>>>> it in the next days.
>>>> <https://www.openoffice.org/why/index.html>
>>>
>>> do you have a pointer where / when we have discussed this?
>>
>> Sadly not really. It was years ago. Maybe it was a discussion within the
>> pmc and never on dev as I do now.
>>
>> But maybe we can discuss again. The following statement seems a bit bold
>> for us.
>>
>> Apache OpenOffice is the leading *open-source* *office software
>> suite* for *word processing*, *spreadsheets*, *presentations*, *
>> graphics*, *databases* and more.
>>
>> Is this something we want to battle for? Or do we want to go with a
>> different statement, that reflects more what we are after?
>>
>> Leading reflects innovation, bleeding edge. We should think then on AI
>> support and other technologies. A lot of people do not feel home in our
>> UI, because we do not follow the closed source market leader.
>> If you check what low code systems do at the moment in terms of
>> databases we are not offering a tool at this point that is at the edge
>> of today's representation.
>>
>> I wonder if we should maybe change this to something that reflects more
>> what we are after. IMHO these are traits like:
>> - Preserving skill
>>
>> - offering a free Version for the public good, with low accessability
>>
>> - The ability to run on a broad support list not only market supported
>> machines.
>>
>>
> That sounds too negative!
>
> We are also under a more permissive license than LO, allowing our code to
> be reused and extended by other parties, even commercially.
>
> We support several file formats better than other open-source office
> suites, eg. the MS Office 2003 XML formats which I've fixed many bugs in
> recently.
>
> We don't have community editions or bug users to donate.
same for me. I don't see a big need to re-word all that text.
Maybe we can change it to "Apache OpenOffice is one of the leading
open-source office software suite for ...". But that's all it would do.
Marcus
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Description
Posted by Matthias Seidel <ma...@hamburg.de>.
Hi Arrigo, All,
Am 24.11.25 um 21:51 schrieb Arrigo Marchiori:
> Hello All,
>
> On Sun, Nov 23, 2025 at 12:23:49AM +0100, apmail-petko@apache.org wrote:
>
>> (as i said i remember a discussion about it, and i am confident we
>> changed it in a different spot, but i do not remember where we
>> changed the sentence or what we have decided for.
> Was it possibly ``The Public Service Mission of Apache OpenOffice'' ?
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/The+Public+Service+Mission+of+Apache+OpenOffice
Most likely...
I still think that we should link to that text from a blog post.
Regards,
Matthias
> Best regards,
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Description
Posted by Arrigo Marchiori <ar...@apache.org>.
Hello All,
On Sun, Nov 23, 2025 at 12:23:49AM +0100, apmail-petko@apache.org wrote:
> (as i said i remember a discussion about it, and i am confident we
> changed it in a different spot, but i do not remember where we
> changed the sentence or what we have decided for.
Was it possibly ``The Public Service Mission of Apache OpenOffice'' ?
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/The+Public+Service+Mission+of+Apache+OpenOffice
Best regards,
--
Arrigo
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Description
Posted by ap...@apache.org.
On 22.11.2025 at 20:57 wrote Dave Fisher:
> My recollection is that the Why website sections are pretty much unchanged (other than formatting and translation) from Oracle’s donation in June 2011.
Is this still describing what we are / want?
Maybe we should review the sentence and change it. (as i said i remember
a discussion about it, and i am confident we changed it in a different
spot, but i do not remember where we changed the sentence or what we
have decided for.
>
>> On Nov 22, 2025, at 10:08 AM, Damjan Jovanovic<da...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>> On Sat, Nov 22, 2025 at 1:10 PM <apmail-petko@apache.org <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
>>
>>> Am 22.11.2025 um 10:32 schrieb Marcus:
>>>> Am 21.11.25 um 14:44 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
>>>>> Haven't we decided to change the description for Apache OpenOffice.
>>>>>
>>>>> I found this old description here. Where is the new one? I would fix
>>>>> it in the next days.
>>>>> <https://www.openoffice.org/why/index.html>
>>>> do you have a pointer where / when we have discussed this?
>>> Sadly not really. It was years ago. Maybe it was a discussion within the
>>> pmc and never on dev as I do now.
>>>
>>> But maybe we can discuss again. The following statement seems a bit bold
>>> for us.
>>>
>>> Apache OpenOffice is the leading *open-source* *office software
>>> suite* for *word processing*, *spreadsheets*, *presentations*, *
>>> graphics*, *databases* and more.
>>>
>>> Is this something we want to battle for? Or do we want to go with a
>>> different statement, that reflects more what we are after?
>>>
>>> Leading reflects innovation, bleeding edge. We should think then on AI
>>> support and other technologies. A lot of people do not feel home in our
>>> UI, because we do not follow the closed source market leader.
>>> If you check what low code systems do at the moment in terms of
>>> databases we are not offering a tool at this point that is at the edge
>>> of today's representation.
>>>
>>> I wonder if we should maybe change this to something that reflects more
>>> what we are after. IMHO these are traits like:
>>> - Preserving skill
>>>
>>> - offering a free Version for the public good, with low accessability
>>>
>>> - The ability to run on a broad support list not only market supported
>>> machines.
>>>
>>>
>> That sounds too negative!
Hmm how about:
*Apache OpenOffice is a mature, reliable, community‑driven open‑source
office suite that offers full freedom through its permissive Apache
License, prioritizing stability and affordability over rapid feature
expansion.*
parts sound familiar.
all the best
peter
Re: Description
Posted by Dave Fisher <wa...@apache.org>.
My recollection is that the Why website sections are pretty much unchanged (other than formatting and translation) from Oracle’s donation in June 2011.
> On Nov 22, 2025, at 10:08 AM, Damjan Jovanovic <da...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> On Sat, Nov 22, 2025 at 1:10 PM <apmail-petko@apache.org <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
>
>>
>> Am 22.11.2025 um 10:32 schrieb Marcus:
>>> Am 21.11.25 um 14:44 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
>>>> Haven't we decided to change the description for Apache OpenOffice.
>>>>
>>>> I found this old description here. Where is the new one? I would fix
>>>> it in the next days.
>>>> <https://www.openoffice.org/why/index.html>
>>>
>>> do you have a pointer where / when we have discussed this?
>>
>> Sadly not really. It was years ago. Maybe it was a discussion within the
>> pmc and never on dev as I do now.
>>
>> But maybe we can discuss again. The following statement seems a bit bold
>> for us.
>>
>> Apache OpenOffice is the leading *open-source* *office software
>> suite* for *word processing*, *spreadsheets*, *presentations*, *
>> graphics*, *databases* and more.
>>
>> Is this something we want to battle for? Or do we want to go with a
>> different statement, that reflects more what we are after?
>>
>> Leading reflects innovation, bleeding edge. We should think then on AI
>> support and other technologies. A lot of people do not feel home in our
>> UI, because we do not follow the closed source market leader.
>> If you check what low code systems do at the moment in terms of
>> databases we are not offering a tool at this point that is at the edge
>> of today's representation.
>>
>> I wonder if we should maybe change this to something that reflects more
>> what we are after. IMHO these are traits like:
>> - Preserving skill
>>
>> - offering a free Version for the public good, with low accessability
>>
>> - The ability to run on a broad support list not only market supported
>> machines.
>>
>>
> That sounds too negative!
>
> We are also under a more permissive license than LO, allowing our code to
> be reused and extended by other parties, even commercially.
>
> We support several file formats better than other open-source office
> suites, eg. the MS Office 2003 XML formats which I've fixed many bugs in
> recently.
>
> We don't have community editions or bug users to donate.
Re: Description
Posted by Damjan Jovanovic <da...@apache.org>.
On Sat, Nov 22, 2025 at 1:10 PM <ap...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> Am 22.11.2025 um 10:32 schrieb Marcus:
> > Am 21.11.25 um 14:44 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
> >> Haven't we decided to change the description for Apache OpenOffice.
> >>
> >> I found this old description here. Where is the new one? I would fix
> >> it in the next days.
> >> <https://www.openoffice.org/why/index.html>
> >
> > do you have a pointer where / when we have discussed this?
>
> Sadly not really. It was years ago. Maybe it was a discussion within the
> pmc and never on dev as I do now.
>
> But maybe we can discuss again. The following statement seems a bit bold
> for us.
>
> Apache OpenOffice is the leading *open-source* *office software
> suite* for *word processing*, *spreadsheets*, *presentations*, *
> graphics*, *databases* and more.
>
> Is this something we want to battle for? Or do we want to go with a
> different statement, that reflects more what we are after?
>
> Leading reflects innovation, bleeding edge. We should think then on AI
> support and other technologies. A lot of people do not feel home in our
> UI, because we do not follow the closed source market leader.
> If you check what low code systems do at the moment in terms of
> databases we are not offering a tool at this point that is at the edge
> of today's representation.
>
> I wonder if we should maybe change this to something that reflects more
> what we are after. IMHO these are traits like:
> - Preserving skill
>
> - offering a free Version for the public good, with low accessability
>
> - The ability to run on a broad support list not only market supported
> machines.
>
>
That sounds too negative!
We are also under a more permissive license than LO, allowing our code to
be reused and extended by other parties, even commercially.
We support several file formats better than other open-source office
suites, eg. the MS Office 2003 XML formats which I've fixed many bugs in
recently.
We don't have community editions or bug users to donate.
Re: Description
Posted by ap...@apache.org.
Am 22.11.2025 um 10:32 schrieb Marcus:
> Am 21.11.25 um 14:44 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
>> Haven't we decided to change the description for Apache OpenOffice.
>>
>> I found this old description here. Where is the new one? I would fix
>> it in the next days.
>> <https://www.openoffice.org/why/index.html>
>
> do you have a pointer where / when we have discussed this?
Sadly not really. It was years ago. Maybe it was a discussion within the
pmc and never on dev as I do now.
But maybe we can discuss again. The following statement seems a bit bold
for us.
Apache OpenOffice is the leading *open-source* *office software
suite* for *word processing*, *spreadsheets*, *presentations*, *
graphics*, *databases* and more.
Is this something we want to battle for? Or do we want to go with a
different statement, that reflects more what we are after?
Leading reflects innovation, bleeding edge. We should think then on AI
support and other technologies. A lot of people do not feel home in our
UI, because we do not follow the closed source market leader.
If you check what low code systems do at the moment in terms of
databases we are not offering a tool at this point that is at the edge
of today's representation.
I wonder if we should maybe change this to something that reflects more
what we are after. IMHO these are traits like:
- Preserving skill
- offering a free Version for the public good, with low accessability
- The ability to run on a broad support list not only market supported
machines.
>
> Thanks
>
> Marcus
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
Re: Description
Posted by Marcus <ma...@wtnet.de>.
Am 21.11.25 um 14:44 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
> Haven't we decided to change the description for Apache OpenOffice.
>
> I found this old description here. Where is the new one? I would fix it in the next days.
> <https://www.openoffice.org/why/index.html>
do you have a pointer where / when we have discussed this?
Thanks
Marcus
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org