You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@openoffice.apache.org by Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com> on 2012/05/10 00:24:53 UTC
how to get information out about non-Apache builds/packages
Do we want to do something to make folks aware of non-Apache packs for AOO
(3.4.0 and beyond).
I don't know how this has been done in the past, if at all.
Right now I know there is a download on freebsd.org, and Wolf has made a
Ubuntu build on ??? (I need to track this down)
Any ideas on this in terms of collection and placement?
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MzK
"Well, life has a funny way of sneaking up on you
And life has a funny way of helping you out
Helping you out."
-- "Ironic", Alanis Morissette
Re: how to get information out about non-Apache builds/packages
Posted by Wolf Halton <wo...@gmail.com>.
On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 6:24 PM, Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Do we want to do something to make folks aware of non-Apache packs for AOO
> (3.4.0 and beyond).
>
> I don't know how this has been done in the past, if at all.
>
> Right now I know there is a download on freebsd.org, and Wolf has made a
> Ubuntu build on ??? (I need to track this down)
>
>
> Any ideas on this in terms of collection and placement?
>
> --
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> MzK
>
> "Well, life has a funny way of sneaking up on you
> And life has a funny way of helping you out
> Helping you out."
> -- "Ironic", Alanis Morissette
>
Clarification: Wolf started a team to package AOO for Ubuntu. We are new
at it and are not entirely done.
Wolf
--
This Apt Has Super Cow Powers - http://sourcefreedom.com
Open-Source Software in Libraries - http://FOSS4Lib.org
Advancing Libraries Together - http://LYRASIS.org
Apache Open Office Developer wolfhalton@apache.org
Re: how to get information out about non-Apache builds/packages
Posted by drew <dr...@baseanswers.com>.
On Thu, 2012-05-10 at 09:00 -0700, Kay Schenk wrote:
> On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 3:41 PM, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 6:24 PM, Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Do we want to do something to make folks aware of non-Apache packs for
> > AOO
> > > (3.4.0 and beyond).
> > >
> > > I don't know how this has been done in the past, if at all.
> > >
> > > Right now I know there is a download on freebsd.org, and Wolf has made a
> > > Ubuntu build on ??? (I need to track this down)
> > >
> > >
> > > Any ideas on this in terms of collection and placement?
> > >
> >
> > Some other Apache projects list derived products on their websites,
> > with a suitable disclaimer. See, for example what Subversion does:
> >
> > http://subversion.apache.org/packages.html
> >
>
> ok, thanks for this bit of information...
>
>
> >
> > I think this is an important part of encouraging the ecosystem. A
> > parent should be proud of his children's accomplishment, and not be
> > jealous. So we want products based on AOO code to be popular, very
> > popular. That is what success looks like,
> >
> > But I don't think we need to search the web for products to list. But
> > if someone requests this we can discuss on a case-by-case basis.
> >
>
> I didn't mean to imply this. I meant dealing with the packagings we are
> sort of already aware of from list members here.
>
>
> > But where to put it? It could be a link from the download/index.html
> > to another page where we maintain that information.
> >
>
> That sounds like a good idea to me...maybe even as a separate sub-category
> a la "Additional Resources" so it's easy to spot.
>
>
> >
> > We'd probably want to have some standards for how these are listed.
> > Otherwise one vendor wants a 50x50 icon, and the next wants a 75x75
> > and then the next wants 200x200 in order to show up better. We need
> > to be fair. So that probably means the listings need to meet some
> > requirement for length and content.
> >
>
> > For example:
> >
> > 1) product must be based on Apache OpenOffice
> >
> > 2) If product uses Apache trademarks they must be used properly, i.e.,
> > permission where needed, attribution,etc.
> >
> > 3) product listing per some specification (see Subversion for one style)
> >
>
> yes...
>
> I'm making an assumption based on what you're saying here, that you think
> it would be better put up as an actual web page, where we could review
> entries, rather than put up this new page as a wiki page. Yes?
I would agree - it's not something I would want to make self-service, as
the wiki is, it would need to be gated so a web page for sure, IMO.
//drew
Re: how to get information out about non-Apache builds/packages
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 12:00 PM, Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 3:41 PM, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 6:24 PM, Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > Do we want to do something to make folks aware of non-Apache packs for
>> AOO
>> > (3.4.0 and beyond).
>> >
>> > I don't know how this has been done in the past, if at all.
>> >
>> > Right now I know there is a download on freebsd.org, and Wolf has made a
>> > Ubuntu build on ??? (I need to track this down)
>> >
>> >
>> > Any ideas on this in terms of collection and placement?
>> >
>>
>> Some other Apache projects list derived products on their websites,
>> with a suitable disclaimer. See, for example what Subversion does:
>>
>> http://subversion.apache.org/packages.html
>>
>
> ok, thanks for this bit of information...
>
>
>>
>> I think this is an important part of encouraging the ecosystem. A
>> parent should be proud of his children's accomplishment, and not be
>> jealous. So we want products based on AOO code to be popular, very
>> popular. That is what success looks like,
>>
>> But I don't think we need to search the web for products to list. But
>> if someone requests this we can discuss on a case-by-case basis.
>>
>
> I didn't mean to imply this. I meant dealing with the packagings we are
> sort of already aware of from list members here.
>
>
>> But where to put it? It could be a link from the download/index.html
>> to another page where we maintain that information.
>>
>
> That sounds like a good idea to me...maybe even as a separate sub-category
> a la "Additional Resources" so it's easy to spot.
>
>
>>
>> We'd probably want to have some standards for how these are listed.
>> Otherwise one vendor wants a 50x50 icon, and the next wants a 75x75
>> and then the next wants 200x200 in order to show up better. We need
>> to be fair. So that probably means the listings need to meet some
>> requirement for length and content.
>>
>
>> For example:
>>
>> 1) product must be based on Apache OpenOffice
>>
>> 2) If product uses Apache trademarks they must be used properly, i.e.,
>> permission where needed, attribution,etc.
>>
>> 3) product listing per some specification (see Subversion for one style)
>>
>
> yes...
>
> I'm making an assumption based on what you're saying here, that you think
> it would be better put up as an actual web page, where we could review
> entries, rather than put up this new page as a wiki page. Yes?
>
Yes, I think we need to approve whatever is listed. Otherwise, what
would prevent someone from adding a listing for a modified version of
OpenOffice that installs spyware on a user's machine?
This is easiest to do with a webpage, I think. We're talking about
what? 3 or so initial listings, maybe a few others over time? It
will never be a real "high rate of change" page.
-Rob
>
>
>> -Rob
>>
>>
>> > --
>> >
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > MzK
>> >
>> > "Well, life has a funny way of sneaking up on you
>> > And life has a funny way of helping you out
>> > Helping you out."
>> > -- "Ironic", Alanis Morissette
>>
>
>
>
> --
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> MzK
>
> "Well, life has a funny way of sneaking up on you
> And life has a funny way of helping you out
> Helping you out."
> -- "Ironic", Alanis Morissette
Re: how to get information out about non-Apache builds/packages
Posted by Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com>.
On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 3:41 PM, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
> On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 6:24 PM, Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Do we want to do something to make folks aware of non-Apache packs for
> AOO
> > (3.4.0 and beyond).
> >
> > I don't know how this has been done in the past, if at all.
> >
> > Right now I know there is a download on freebsd.org, and Wolf has made a
> > Ubuntu build on ??? (I need to track this down)
> >
> >
> > Any ideas on this in terms of collection and placement?
> >
>
> Some other Apache projects list derived products on their websites,
> with a suitable disclaimer. See, for example what Subversion does:
>
> http://subversion.apache.org/packages.html
>
ok, thanks for this bit of information...
>
> I think this is an important part of encouraging the ecosystem. A
> parent should be proud of his children's accomplishment, and not be
> jealous. So we want products based on AOO code to be popular, very
> popular. That is what success looks like,
>
> But I don't think we need to search the web for products to list. But
> if someone requests this we can discuss on a case-by-case basis.
>
I didn't mean to imply this. I meant dealing with the packagings we are
sort of already aware of from list members here.
> But where to put it? It could be a link from the download/index.html
> to another page where we maintain that information.
>
That sounds like a good idea to me...maybe even as a separate sub-category
a la "Additional Resources" so it's easy to spot.
>
> We'd probably want to have some standards for how these are listed.
> Otherwise one vendor wants a 50x50 icon, and the next wants a 75x75
> and then the next wants 200x200 in order to show up better. We need
> to be fair. So that probably means the listings need to meet some
> requirement for length and content.
>
> For example:
>
> 1) product must be based on Apache OpenOffice
>
> 2) If product uses Apache trademarks they must be used properly, i.e.,
> permission where needed, attribution,etc.
>
> 3) product listing per some specification (see Subversion for one style)
>
yes...
I'm making an assumption based on what you're saying here, that you think
it would be better put up as an actual web page, where we could review
entries, rather than put up this new page as a wiki page. Yes?
> -Rob
>
>
> > --
> >
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > MzK
> >
> > "Well, life has a funny way of sneaking up on you
> > And life has a funny way of helping you out
> > Helping you out."
> > -- "Ironic", Alanis Morissette
>
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MzK
"Well, life has a funny way of sneaking up on you
And life has a funny way of helping you out
Helping you out."
-- "Ironic", Alanis Morissette
Re: how to get information out about non-Apache builds/packages
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 6:24 PM, Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Do we want to do something to make folks aware of non-Apache packs for AOO
> (3.4.0 and beyond).
>
> I don't know how this has been done in the past, if at all.
>
> Right now I know there is a download on freebsd.org, and Wolf has made a
> Ubuntu build on ??? (I need to track this down)
>
>
> Any ideas on this in terms of collection and placement?
>
Some other Apache projects list derived products on their websites,
with a suitable disclaimer. See, for example what Subversion does:
http://subversion.apache.org/packages.html
I think this is an important part of encouraging the ecosystem. A
parent should be proud of his children's accomplishment, and not be
jealous. So we want products based on AOO code to be popular, very
popular. That is what success looks like,
But I don't think we need to search the web for products to list. But
if someone requests this we can discuss on a case-by-case basis.
But where to put it? It could be a link from the download/index.html
to another page where we maintain that information.
We'd probably want to have some standards for how these are listed.
Otherwise one vendor wants a 50x50 icon, and the next wants a 75x75
and then the next wants 200x200 in order to show up better. We need
to be fair. So that probably means the listings need to meet some
requirement for length and content.
For example:
1) product must be based on Apache OpenOffice
2) If product uses Apache trademarks they must be used properly, i.e.,
permission where needed, attribution,etc.
3) product listing per some specification (see Subversion for one style)
-Rob
> --
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> MzK
>
> "Well, life has a funny way of sneaking up on you
> And life has a funny way of helping you out
> Helping you out."
> -- "Ironic", Alanis Morissette