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 2013/06/11 02:19:14 UTC
[DISCUSS] a new web area for Apache OpenOffice third party products
We used to have the old Distribution project that for the most part has
been revised to a very minimal presence...
http://www.openoffice.org/distribution/
Recently, there seems to be a renewed interest in posting information
about new and former Apache OpenOffice distribution outlets -- notably
CD/DVD sets. And old page containing CD/DVD vendors still exists but is
not linked in any place. Since /distribution/cdrom/sellers.html is
redirected because of changes to this area, you can see and download the
old page from svn:
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/openoffice/ooo-site/trunk/content/distribution/cdrom/sellers.html?view=log
Are we interested in reviving this listing, or something similar to it?
Pros...Cons, etc.
A new listing would not have to be by region as this old one is. Given
update issues in the past, if we provided a new listing page, we would
likely need disclaimers regarding: accuracy, support, relation to Apache
OpenOffice(this project), etc.
As with all our web pages, we could accept additions though the CMS from
non-commtters.
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MzK
"You can't believe one thing and do another.
What you believe and what you do are the same thing."
-- Leonard Peltier
Re: [DISCUSS] a new web area for Apache OpenOffice third party products
Posted by Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com>.
On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 3:31 PM, Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Sun, Jun 16, 2013 at 5:40 PM, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, Jun 16, 2013 at 5:38 PM, Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > On Fri, Jun 14, 2013 at 4:11 PM, Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Fri, Jun 14, 2013 at 10:31 AM, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> On Fri, Jun 14, 2013 at 12:14 PM, Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com>
>> >>> wrote:
>> >>> .
>> >>> .
>> >>> .
>> >>>
>> >>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> >>> > Levels in which we might do things:
>> >>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> >>> > Level 1 -- Do nothing but watch for abuses. If someone
>> wants to
>> >>> >>> sell
>> >>> >>> >>> > a CD, then they are free to do it, per the license. They
>> can
>> >>> >>> >>> > advertise on eBay, their website, etc., but they have no
>> >>> permission
>> >>> >>> to
>> >>> >>> >>> > use the trademarks. Nothing special on our website.
>> >>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> >>>
>> >>> >>> >>>
>> >>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> >>> > Level 2 -- We allow a listing on our website (or wiki) of
>> those
>> >>> who
>> >>> >>> >>> > offer CDs. But we make no attempt to verify anything. It
>> is
>> >>> all
>> >>> >>> >>> > "caveat emptor". We put in disclaimers on the page so users
>> >>> know
>> >>> >>> that
>> >>> >>> >>> > we have not vetted anything.
>> >>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> >>> > Level 3 -- We review requests for listing and approve them
>> only
>> >>> if
>> >>> >>> >>> > they meet our qualifications, which might include proper
>> use of
>> >>> >>> >>> > trademarks, a link back to our website, etc. This is
>> similar to
>> >>> what
>> >>> >>> >>> > we did with consultants.
>> >>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> >>> > Level 4 -- Like Level 3, but for those distributors who
>> meet our
>> >>> >>> >>> > qualifications we offer a special logo they can use,
>> something
>> >>> like
>> >>> >>> a
>> >>> >>> >>> > "Community Distributor".
>> >>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> .
>> >>> .
>> >>> .
>> >>>
>> >>> >>>
>> >>> >>
>> >>> > It seems there is at least some consensus of moving ahead with a CD
>> >>> vendor
>> >>> > page similar to the consultants page:
>> >>> >
>> >>> > http://www.openoffice.org/bizdev/consultants.html
>> >>> >
>> >>> > so, Rob, if you feel inclined to work on #1 and #2 from your
>> suggestions
>> >>> > above, please feel free to draft up something for us to review. Then
>> >>> move
>> >>> > on to #3?
>> >>> >
>> >>>
>> >>> We might be able to jump directly to #3. We don't need to do #1 or #2
>> >>> first.
>> >>>
>> >>> I've started to draft the "Distributor Best Practices" page here:
>> >>>
>> >>> http://www.openoffice.org/distribution/best-practices.html
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >> ok, this looks pretty good...
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>>
>> >>> I think in the end we need three pages:
>> >>>
>> >>> 1) The main page, which is the listings page.
>> >>>
>> >>> 2) The Distributor Best Practices page
>> >>>
>> >>> 3) An instructions page for would-be distributors, of how to get
>> >>> listed. It might grow over time to include links to ISO's, CD labels,
>> >>> etc., in the future.
>> >>>
>> >>> These pages would be cross-linked.
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> > So, we don't have to un-reroute what we've already done with the
>> old
>> >>> > distribution area, I'm inclined to put this new CD page(s) in bizdev
>> >>> also.
>> >>> >
>> >>> > I'm hoping we can just implement this with xml and xslt. I'll do
>> some
>> >>> > testing in a day or so.
>> >>> >
>> >>>
>> >>> That could be done now or later on. It is OK to start with a static
>> >>> HTML page (not MDText) and prototype the design and even go live with
>> >>> it, and then add the XSLT automation to generate it later. Depending
>> >>> on the number of listings automation might not be needed.
>> >>>
>> >>> Do you want to mock up a distributor listings page?
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >> Yes, I can do this over the next day or so I think. I just do up a
>> static
>> >> HTML as you suggest. Maybe like the old listing but without the region
>> info
>> >> -- to start.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> I started looking at some XML, and XSL just now, and well, not sure how
>> >> this could be handled with the CMS vis a vis standard page headers
>> etc.
>> >> We could probaly define a "new" page type.
>> >>
>> >> For now, static HTML it is.
>> >>
>> >
>> > OK, start here (revision of /distribution/index.html)
>> >
>> > http://www.openoffice.org/distribution/index_new.html
>> >
>>
>> This is a good start.
>>
>> I wonder if the main page (index.html) should the end-user facing
>> page, e.g., the distributor listings? And then have the FAQ be in
>> distributor-faqs.html or something like that?
>
>
> This might be a good idea. The main facing page IS a bit "preachy" I
> guess. The legacy Distribution project's main index page was more like a
> combination of the FAQ and "best practices" with links to CDs, etc. But if
> we're only going to be dealing with CDs, no reason to keep that
> organization, and it would probably be more friendly for users. (I have an
> archive of the old /distribution/index.html).
>
>
>
>
>> Not a big deal, just
>> an idea. Do we know what existing incoming links from 3rd party
>> websites point to?
>
>
> I can't answer this one.
>
>
>
>> (or even OO websites?)
>
>
> Because "distribution" used to be a separate project, there are many links
> to "distribution.openoffice.org" and a fair number JUST the cdrom area.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Whatever URL was used for
>> the distributor list before should probably stay as the listing page.
>> That way the existing links will still be accurate.
>>
>> http://www.openoffice.org/distribution/distributors.html
>>
>
> Since there were more than just CD vendors before, I think the page you
> would want to keep the same would be:
>
> /distribution/cdrom/sellers.html --and/or--
> /distribution/cdrom/index.html
>
> The two pages above are in my old archive and are practically identical.
>
> I used this as kind of a template for:
>
> http://www.openoffice.org/distribution/distributors.html
>
> So... we could:
> * replace the old sellers.html with the contents that is now in
> http://www.openoffice.org/distribution/distributors.html
> and make that the landing page
>
> and, then have THAT link to the FAQ, and Best Practices which are locate
> in:
>
> http://www.openoffice.org/distribution<http://www.openoffice.org/distribution/distributors.html>
>
> I suggest we just leave the /distribution/index.html ( the FAQs) where
> they are as there are some cases where links still exist to "
> distribution.openoffice.org" so that would still resolve.
>
> I guess we can discuss other matters once we get these moved where we want
> them to eventually go.
>
>
>
>> Instead of "Location"
>
>
> I thought this was supposed to be where the company was located...
>
>
>> maybe "Countries Served" or something like that.
>> Or, in the application process we have a "data dictionary" that
>> explains exactly what we want in each field. (I'm assuming that it
>> would be common for someone in the US to be able to sent to Canada
>> easily, and someone within the EU can cover more than one country if
>> they want.
>>
>> "Additional Information"? I'd drop that unless we think it is really
>> necessary. Otherwise it is easy for that to turn into an
>> advertisement. Additional information can go on their website.
>>
>
> Maybe indicate if the medium is CD or DVD? And for what OS versions?
> This might save users some clicks.
>
>
>>
>> > Mockups needing MUCH discussion I'm sure.
>> >
>>
>> It is a good start. Maybe we iterate just a little bit more and then
>> do the Call for Comments on the blog, so we can get some distributor
>> and user views on this.
>>
>
> OK, I can start moving things around soonish.
>
Maybe start from the new listing location now and see how things are
progressing:
http://www.openoffice.org/distribution/cdrom/sellers.html
/distribution/cdrom/sellers.html will also be copies to
/distribution/cdrom/index.html
>
>
>>
>> I'm also thinking that a CD label graphic from the project would be a
>> very good thing. Almost every distributor would want one. We can
>> avoid a lot of trademark use review requests if we have a label that
>> can be used by listed distributors.
>>
>
Good idea! Using our new logo -- but we still need just the new orb for
this.
>
>> -Rob
>>
>> >
>> >>
>> >>>
>> >>> Regards,
>> >>>
>> >>> -Rob
>> >>>
>> >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>> >>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >>
>> >>
>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >> MzK
>> >>
>> >> "Normal is not something to aspire to, it is something to get away
>> from."
>> >>
>> >> -- Jodie Foster
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> >
>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > MzK
>> >
>> > "Normal is not something to aspire to, it is something to get away
>> from."
>> >
>> > -- Jodie Foster
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Opinions expressed in this communication reflect the author's
>> individual personal view, not necessarily that of an amorphous
>> collective. The above statements do not reflect an official position
>> of any organization, corporation, religion (organized or disorganized)
>> or national football association. The contents of said note are not
>> guaranteed to have been spell checked, grammar checked or reviewed for
>> metrical infelicities. The contents of this post may not be suitable
>> for those whose native language is not logic. Caution should be
>> exercised when operating heavy machinery when reading this note, or
>> even when not reading it. Seriously, heavy machinery is dangerous.
>> Be careful.
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>
>>
>
>
> --
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> MzK
>
> "Normal is not something to aspire to, it is something to get away from."
>
> -- Jodie Foster
>
>
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MzK
"Normal is not something to aspire to, it is something to get away from."
-- Jodie Foster
Re: [DISCUSS] a new web area for Apache OpenOffice third party products
Posted by Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com>.
On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 12:24 PM, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 6:31 PM, Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Sun, Jun 16, 2013 at 5:40 PM, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> >> On Sun, Jun 16, 2013 at 5:38 PM, Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >> > On Fri, Jun 14, 2013 at 4:11 PM, Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> On Fri, Jun 14, 2013 at 10:31 AM, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >>> On Fri, Jun 14, 2013 at 12:14 PM, Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com>
> >> >>> wrote:
> >> >>> .
> >> >>> .
> >> >>> .
> >> >>>
> >> >>> >>> >>> >
> >> >>> >>> >>> > Levels in which we might do things:
> >> >>> >>> >>> >
> >> >>> >>> >>> > Level 1 -- Do nothing but watch for abuses. If someone
> >> wants to
> >> >>> >>> sell
> >> >>> >>> >>> > a CD, then they are free to do it, per the license. They
> can
> >> >>> >>> >>> > advertise on eBay, their website, etc., but they have no
> >> >>> permission
> >> >>> >>> to
> >> >>> >>> >>> > use the trademarks. Nothing special on our website.
> >> >>> >>> >>> >
> >> >>> >>> >>>
> >> >>> >>> >>>
> >> >>> >>> >>> >
> >> >>> >>> >>> > Level 2 -- We allow a listing on our website (or wiki) of
> >> those
> >> >>> who
> >> >>> >>> >>> > offer CDs. But we make no attempt to verify anything.
> It is
> >> >>> all
> >> >>> >>> >>> > "caveat emptor". We put in disclaimers on the page so
> users
> >> >>> know
> >> >>> >>> that
> >> >>> >>> >>> > we have not vetted anything.
> >> >>> >>> >>> >
> >> >>> >>> >>> > Level 3 -- We review requests for listing and approve them
> >> only
> >> >>> if
> >> >>> >>> >>> > they meet our qualifications, which might include proper
> use
> >> of
> >> >>> >>> >>> > trademarks, a link back to our website, etc. This is
> similar
> >> to
> >> >>> what
> >> >>> >>> >>> > we did with consultants.
> >> >>> >>> >>> >
> >> >>> >>> >>> > Level 4 -- Like Level 3, but for those distributors who
> meet
> >> our
> >> >>> >>> >>> > qualifications we offer a special logo they can use,
> >> something
> >> >>> like
> >> >>> >>> a
> >> >>> >>> >>> > "Community Distributor".
> >> >>> >>> >>> >
> >> >>> .
> >> >>> .
> >> >>> .
> >> >>>
> >> >>> >>>
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> > It seems there is at least some consensus of moving ahead with a
> CD
> >> >>> vendor
> >> >>> > page similar to the consultants page:
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > http://www.openoffice.org/bizdev/consultants.html
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > so, Rob, if you feel inclined to work on #1 and #2 from your
> >> suggestions
> >> >>> > above, please feel free to draft up something for us to review.
> Then
> >> >>> move
> >> >>> > on to #3?
> >> >>> >
> >> >>>
> >> >>> We might be able to jump directly to #3. We don't need to do #1 or
> #2
> >> >>> first.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> I've started to draft the "Distributor Best Practices" page here:
> >> >>>
> >> >>> http://www.openoffice.org/distribution/best-practices.html
> >> >>>
> >> >>
> >> >> ok, this looks pretty good...
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> I think in the end we need three pages:
> >> >>>
> >> >>> 1) The main page, which is the listings page.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> 2) The Distributor Best Practices page
> >> >>>
> >> >>> 3) An instructions page for would-be distributors, of how to get
> >> >>> listed. It might grow over time to include links to ISO's, CD
> labels,
> >> >>> etc., in the future.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> These pages would be cross-linked.
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> > So, we don't have to un-reroute what we've already done with the
> old
> >> >>> > distribution area, I'm inclined to put this new CD page(s) in
> bizdev
> >> >>> also.
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > I'm hoping we can just implement this with xml and xslt. I'll do
> some
> >> >>> > testing in a day or so.
> >> >>> >
> >> >>>
> >> >>> That could be done now or later on. It is OK to start with a static
> >> >>> HTML page (not MDText) and prototype the design and even go live
> with
> >> >>> it, and then add the XSLT automation to generate it later.
> Depending
> >> >>> on the number of listings automation might not be needed.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Do you want to mock up a distributor listings page?
> >> >>>
> >> >>
> >> >> Yes, I can do this over the next day or so I think. I just do up a
> >> static
> >> >> HTML as you suggest. Maybe like the old listing but without the
> region
> >> info
> >> >> -- to start.
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> I started looking at some XML, and XSL just now, and well, not sure
> how
> >> >> this could be handled with the CMS vis a vis standard page headers
> etc.
> >> >> We could probaly define a "new" page type.
> >> >>
> >> >> For now, static HTML it is.
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> > OK, start here (revision of /distribution/index.html)
> >> >
> >> > http://www.openoffice.org/distribution/index_new.html
> >> >
> >>
> >> This is a good start.
> >>
> >> I wonder if the main page (index.html) should the end-user facing
> >> page, e.g., the distributor listings? And then have the FAQ be in
> >> distributor-faqs.html or something like that?
> >
> >
> > This might be a good idea. The main facing page IS a bit "preachy" I
> guess.
> > The legacy Distribution project's main index page was more like a
> > combination of the FAQ and "best practices" with links to CDs, etc. But
> if
> > we're only going to be dealing with CDs, no reason to keep that
> > organization, and it would probably be more friendly for users. (I have
> an
> > archive of the old /distribution/index.html).
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >> Not a big deal, just
> >> an idea. Do we know what existing incoming links from 3rd party
> >> websites point to?
> >
> >
> > I can't answer this one.
> >
>
> I did some research and found:
>
> http://www.openoffice.org/distribution/ (1183 links from 76 domains)
>
> http://www.openoffice.org/distribution/cdrom/sellers.html (273 links
> from 78 domains)
>
> http://www.openoffice.org/distribution/cdrom/ (3728 links from 242
> domains)
>
>
> >
> >
> >> (or even OO websites?)
> >
> >
> > Because "distribution" used to be a separate project, there are many
> links
> > to "distribution.openoffice.org" and a fair number JUST the cdrom area.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Whatever URL was used for
> >> the distributor list before should probably stay as the listing page.
> >> That way the existing links will still be accurate.
> >>
> >> http://www.openoffice.org/distribution/distributors.html
> >>
> >
> > Since there were more than just CD vendors before, I think the page you
> > would want to keep the same would be:
> >
> > /distribution/cdrom/sellers.html --and/or--
> /distribution/cdrom/index.html
> >
>
> It looks like the cdrom/index.html was the most popular one. So maybe
> make that the primary one and redirect or link the others.
>
cdrom/sellers/html ( the one I recently modified) and cdrom/index.html
were/are identical.
So, when we're ready to go, I'll just copy sellers.html to index.html
For now, I left cdrom/index.html as it is.
>
> > The two pages above are in my old archive and are practically identical.
> >
> > I used this as kind of a template for:
> >
> > http://www.openoffice.org/distribution/distributors.html
> >
> > So... we could:
> > * replace the old sellers.html with the contents that is now in
> > http://www.openoffice.org/distribution/distributors.html
> > and make that the landing page
> >
> > and, then have THAT link to the FAQ, and Best Practices which are locate
> in:
> >
> > http://www.openoffice.org/distribution<
> http://www.openoffice.org/distribution/distributors.html>
> >
> > I suggest we just leave the /distribution/index.html ( the FAQs) where
> > they are as there are some cases where links still exist to "
> > distribution.openoffice.org" so that would still resolve.
> >
> > I guess we can discuss other matters once we get these moved where we
> want
> > them to eventually go.
> >
> >
> >
> >> Instead of "Location"
> >
> >
> > I thought this was supposed to be where the company was located...
> >
>
> Sure.
>
> >
> >> maybe "Countries Served" or something like that.
> >> Or, in the application process we have a "data dictionary" that
> >> explains exactly what we want in each field. (I'm assuming that it
> >> would be common for someone in the US to be able to sent to Canada
> >> easily, and someone within the EU can cover more than one country if
> >> they want.
> >>
> >> "Additional Information"? I'd drop that unless we think it is really
> >> necessary. Otherwise it is easy for that to turn into an
> >> advertisement. Additional information can go on their website.
> >>
> >
> > Maybe indicate if the medium is CD or DVD? And for what OS versions?
> > This might save users some clicks.
> >
>
> If we link these are useful we might just add columns specifical for
> "Medium" and "OS". It will make it easier for users to visually scan
> the table if things are in the same place for every entry.
>
Yes, I thought about that right after I sent this. I just added these
columns to /cdrom/sellers.html.
> >
> >>
> >> > Mockups needing MUCH discussion I'm sure.
> >> >
> >>
> >> It is a good start. Maybe we iterate just a little bit more and then
> >> do the Call for Comments on the blog, so we can get some distributor
> >> and user views on this.
> >>
> >
> > OK, I can start moving things around soonish.
> >
>
> OK. Thanks. I'll start revising the blog post I had started, to
> turn it into a Call for Comments.
>
> -Rob
>
Great! I think getting this listing back up is sure to make some of our
supporters happy.
>
>
> >
> >>
> >> I'm also thinking that a CD label graphic from the project would be a
> >> very good thing. Almost every distributor would want one. We can
> >> avoid a lot of trademark use review requests if we have a label that
> >> can be used by listed distributors.
> >>
> >> -Rob
> >>
> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Regards,
> >> >>>
> >> >>> -Rob
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> >> >>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> --
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> >> MzK
> >> >>
> >> >> "Normal is not something to aspire to, it is something to get away
> >> from."
> >> >>
> >> >> -- Jodie Foster
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> >
> >>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> > MzK
> >> >
> >> > "Normal is not something to aspire to, it is something to get away
> from."
> >> >
> >> > -- Jodie Foster
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Opinions expressed in this communication reflect the author's
> >> individual personal view, not necessarily that of an amorphous
> >> collective. The above statements do not reflect an official position
> >> of any organization, corporation, religion (organized or disorganized)
> >> or national football association. The contents of said note are not
> >> guaranteed to have been spell checked, grammar checked or reviewed for
> >> metrical infelicities. The contents of this post may not be suitable
> >> for those whose native language is not logic. Caution should be
> >> exercised when operating heavy machinery when reading this note, or
> >> even when not reading it. Seriously, heavy machinery is dangerous.
> >> Be careful.
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > MzK
> >
> > "Normal is not something to aspire to, it is something to get away from."
> >
> > -- Jodie Foster
>
>
>
> --
> Opinions expressed in this communication reflect the author's
> individual personal view, not necessarily that of an amorphous
> collective. The above statements do not reflect an official position
> of any organization, corporation, religion (organized or disorganized)
> or national football association. The contents of said note are not
> guaranteed to have been spell checked, grammar checked or reviewed for
> metrical infelicities. The contents of this post may not be suitable
> for those whose native language is not logic. Caution should be
> exercised when operating heavy machinery when reading this note, or
> even when not reading it. Seriously, heavy machinery is dangerous.
> Be careful.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
>
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MzK
"Normal is not something to aspire to, it is something to get away from."
-- Jodie Foster
Re: [DISCUSS] a new web area for Apache OpenOffice third party products
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 6:31 PM, Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 16, 2013 at 5:40 PM, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, Jun 16, 2013 at 5:38 PM, Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > On Fri, Jun 14, 2013 at 4:11 PM, Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Fri, Jun 14, 2013 at 10:31 AM, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> On Fri, Jun 14, 2013 at 12:14 PM, Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com>
>> >>> wrote:
>> >>> .
>> >>> .
>> >>> .
>> >>>
>> >>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> >>> > Levels in which we might do things:
>> >>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> >>> > Level 1 -- Do nothing but watch for abuses. If someone
>> wants to
>> >>> >>> sell
>> >>> >>> >>> > a CD, then they are free to do it, per the license. They can
>> >>> >>> >>> > advertise on eBay, their website, etc., but they have no
>> >>> permission
>> >>> >>> to
>> >>> >>> >>> > use the trademarks. Nothing special on our website.
>> >>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> >>>
>> >>> >>> >>>
>> >>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> >>> > Level 2 -- We allow a listing on our website (or wiki) of
>> those
>> >>> who
>> >>> >>> >>> > offer CDs. But we make no attempt to verify anything. It is
>> >>> all
>> >>> >>> >>> > "caveat emptor". We put in disclaimers on the page so users
>> >>> know
>> >>> >>> that
>> >>> >>> >>> > we have not vetted anything.
>> >>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> >>> > Level 3 -- We review requests for listing and approve them
>> only
>> >>> if
>> >>> >>> >>> > they meet our qualifications, which might include proper use
>> of
>> >>> >>> >>> > trademarks, a link back to our website, etc. This is similar
>> to
>> >>> what
>> >>> >>> >>> > we did with consultants.
>> >>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> >>> > Level 4 -- Like Level 3, but for those distributors who meet
>> our
>> >>> >>> >>> > qualifications we offer a special logo they can use,
>> something
>> >>> like
>> >>> >>> a
>> >>> >>> >>> > "Community Distributor".
>> >>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> .
>> >>> .
>> >>> .
>> >>>
>> >>> >>>
>> >>> >>
>> >>> > It seems there is at least some consensus of moving ahead with a CD
>> >>> vendor
>> >>> > page similar to the consultants page:
>> >>> >
>> >>> > http://www.openoffice.org/bizdev/consultants.html
>> >>> >
>> >>> > so, Rob, if you feel inclined to work on #1 and #2 from your
>> suggestions
>> >>> > above, please feel free to draft up something for us to review. Then
>> >>> move
>> >>> > on to #3?
>> >>> >
>> >>>
>> >>> We might be able to jump directly to #3. We don't need to do #1 or #2
>> >>> first.
>> >>>
>> >>> I've started to draft the "Distributor Best Practices" page here:
>> >>>
>> >>> http://www.openoffice.org/distribution/best-practices.html
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >> ok, this looks pretty good...
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>>
>> >>> I think in the end we need three pages:
>> >>>
>> >>> 1) The main page, which is the listings page.
>> >>>
>> >>> 2) The Distributor Best Practices page
>> >>>
>> >>> 3) An instructions page for would-be distributors, of how to get
>> >>> listed. It might grow over time to include links to ISO's, CD labels,
>> >>> etc., in the future.
>> >>>
>> >>> These pages would be cross-linked.
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> > So, we don't have to un-reroute what we've already done with the old
>> >>> > distribution area, I'm inclined to put this new CD page(s) in bizdev
>> >>> also.
>> >>> >
>> >>> > I'm hoping we can just implement this with xml and xslt. I'll do some
>> >>> > testing in a day or so.
>> >>> >
>> >>>
>> >>> That could be done now or later on. It is OK to start with a static
>> >>> HTML page (not MDText) and prototype the design and even go live with
>> >>> it, and then add the XSLT automation to generate it later. Depending
>> >>> on the number of listings automation might not be needed.
>> >>>
>> >>> Do you want to mock up a distributor listings page?
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >> Yes, I can do this over the next day or so I think. I just do up a
>> static
>> >> HTML as you suggest. Maybe like the old listing but without the region
>> info
>> >> -- to start.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> I started looking at some XML, and XSL just now, and well, not sure how
>> >> this could be handled with the CMS vis a vis standard page headers etc.
>> >> We could probaly define a "new" page type.
>> >>
>> >> For now, static HTML it is.
>> >>
>> >
>> > OK, start here (revision of /distribution/index.html)
>> >
>> > http://www.openoffice.org/distribution/index_new.html
>> >
>>
>> This is a good start.
>>
>> I wonder if the main page (index.html) should the end-user facing
>> page, e.g., the distributor listings? And then have the FAQ be in
>> distributor-faqs.html or something like that?
>
>
> This might be a good idea. The main facing page IS a bit "preachy" I guess.
> The legacy Distribution project's main index page was more like a
> combination of the FAQ and "best practices" with links to CDs, etc. But if
> we're only going to be dealing with CDs, no reason to keep that
> organization, and it would probably be more friendly for users. (I have an
> archive of the old /distribution/index.html).
>
>
>
>
>> Not a big deal, just
>> an idea. Do we know what existing incoming links from 3rd party
>> websites point to?
>
>
> I can't answer this one.
>
I did some research and found:
http://www.openoffice.org/distribution/ (1183 links from 76 domains)
http://www.openoffice.org/distribution/cdrom/sellers.html (273 links
from 78 domains)
http://www.openoffice.org/distribution/cdrom/ (3728 links from 242 domains)
>
>
>> (or even OO websites?)
>
>
> Because "distribution" used to be a separate project, there are many links
> to "distribution.openoffice.org" and a fair number JUST the cdrom area.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Whatever URL was used for
>> the distributor list before should probably stay as the listing page.
>> That way the existing links will still be accurate.
>>
>> http://www.openoffice.org/distribution/distributors.html
>>
>
> Since there were more than just CD vendors before, I think the page you
> would want to keep the same would be:
>
> /distribution/cdrom/sellers.html --and/or-- /distribution/cdrom/index.html
>
It looks like the cdrom/index.html was the most popular one. So maybe
make that the primary one and redirect or link the others.
> The two pages above are in my old archive and are practically identical.
>
> I used this as kind of a template for:
>
> http://www.openoffice.org/distribution/distributors.html
>
> So... we could:
> * replace the old sellers.html with the contents that is now in
> http://www.openoffice.org/distribution/distributors.html
> and make that the landing page
>
> and, then have THAT link to the FAQ, and Best Practices which are locate in:
>
> http://www.openoffice.org/distribution<http://www.openoffice.org/distribution/distributors.html>
>
> I suggest we just leave the /distribution/index.html ( the FAQs) where
> they are as there are some cases where links still exist to "
> distribution.openoffice.org" so that would still resolve.
>
> I guess we can discuss other matters once we get these moved where we want
> them to eventually go.
>
>
>
>> Instead of "Location"
>
>
> I thought this was supposed to be where the company was located...
>
Sure.
>
>> maybe "Countries Served" or something like that.
>> Or, in the application process we have a "data dictionary" that
>> explains exactly what we want in each field. (I'm assuming that it
>> would be common for someone in the US to be able to sent to Canada
>> easily, and someone within the EU can cover more than one country if
>> they want.
>>
>> "Additional Information"? I'd drop that unless we think it is really
>> necessary. Otherwise it is easy for that to turn into an
>> advertisement. Additional information can go on their website.
>>
>
> Maybe indicate if the medium is CD or DVD? And for what OS versions?
> This might save users some clicks.
>
If we link these are useful we might just add columns specifical for
"Medium" and "OS". It will make it easier for users to visually scan
the table if things are in the same place for every entry.
>
>>
>> > Mockups needing MUCH discussion I'm sure.
>> >
>>
>> It is a good start. Maybe we iterate just a little bit more and then
>> do the Call for Comments on the blog, so we can get some distributor
>> and user views on this.
>>
>
> OK, I can start moving things around soonish.
>
OK. Thanks. I'll start revising the blog post I had started, to
turn it into a Call for Comments.
-Rob
>
>>
>> I'm also thinking that a CD label graphic from the project would be a
>> very good thing. Almost every distributor would want one. We can
>> avoid a lot of trademark use review requests if we have a label that
>> can be used by listed distributors.
>>
>> -Rob
>>
>> >
>> >>
>> >>>
>> >>> Regards,
>> >>>
>> >>> -Rob
>> >>>
>> >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>> >>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >>
>> >>
>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >> MzK
>> >>
>> >> "Normal is not something to aspire to, it is something to get away
>> from."
>> >>
>> >> -- Jodie Foster
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> >
>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > MzK
>> >
>> > "Normal is not something to aspire to, it is something to get away from."
>> >
>> > -- Jodie Foster
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Opinions expressed in this communication reflect the author's
>> individual personal view, not necessarily that of an amorphous
>> collective. The above statements do not reflect an official position
>> of any organization, corporation, religion (organized or disorganized)
>> or national football association. The contents of said note are not
>> guaranteed to have been spell checked, grammar checked or reviewed for
>> metrical infelicities. The contents of this post may not be suitable
>> for those whose native language is not logic. Caution should be
>> exercised when operating heavy machinery when reading this note, or
>> even when not reading it. Seriously, heavy machinery is dangerous.
>> Be careful.
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> MzK
>
> "Normal is not something to aspire to, it is something to get away from."
>
> -- Jodie Foster
--
Opinions expressed in this communication reflect the author's
individual personal view, not necessarily that of an amorphous
collective. The above statements do not reflect an official position
of any organization, corporation, religion (organized or disorganized)
or national football association. The contents of said note are not
guaranteed to have been spell checked, grammar checked or reviewed for
metrical infelicities. The contents of this post may not be suitable
for those whose native language is not logic. Caution should be
exercised when operating heavy machinery when reading this note, or
even when not reading it. Seriously, heavy machinery is dangerous.
Be careful.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] a new web area for Apache OpenOffice third party products
Posted by Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com>.
On Sun, Jun 16, 2013 at 5:40 PM, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 16, 2013 at 5:38 PM, Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 14, 2013 at 4:11 PM, Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> On Fri, Jun 14, 2013 at 10:31 AM, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
> >>
> >>> On Fri, Jun 14, 2013 at 12:14 PM, Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>> .
> >>> .
> >>> .
> >>>
> >>> >>> >>> >
> >>> >>> >>> > Levels in which we might do things:
> >>> >>> >>> >
> >>> >>> >>> > Level 1 -- Do nothing but watch for abuses. If someone
> wants to
> >>> >>> sell
> >>> >>> >>> > a CD, then they are free to do it, per the license. They can
> >>> >>> >>> > advertise on eBay, their website, etc., but they have no
> >>> permission
> >>> >>> to
> >>> >>> >>> > use the trademarks. Nothing special on our website.
> >>> >>> >>> >
> >>> >>> >>>
> >>> >>> >>>
> >>> >>> >>> >
> >>> >>> >>> > Level 2 -- We allow a listing on our website (or wiki) of
> those
> >>> who
> >>> >>> >>> > offer CDs. But we make no attempt to verify anything. It is
> >>> all
> >>> >>> >>> > "caveat emptor". We put in disclaimers on the page so users
> >>> know
> >>> >>> that
> >>> >>> >>> > we have not vetted anything.
> >>> >>> >>> >
> >>> >>> >>> > Level 3 -- We review requests for listing and approve them
> only
> >>> if
> >>> >>> >>> > they meet our qualifications, which might include proper use
> of
> >>> >>> >>> > trademarks, a link back to our website, etc. This is similar
> to
> >>> what
> >>> >>> >>> > we did with consultants.
> >>> >>> >>> >
> >>> >>> >>> > Level 4 -- Like Level 3, but for those distributors who meet
> our
> >>> >>> >>> > qualifications we offer a special logo they can use,
> something
> >>> like
> >>> >>> a
> >>> >>> >>> > "Community Distributor".
> >>> >>> >>> >
> >>> .
> >>> .
> >>> .
> >>>
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>
> >>> > It seems there is at least some consensus of moving ahead with a CD
> >>> vendor
> >>> > page similar to the consultants page:
> >>> >
> >>> > http://www.openoffice.org/bizdev/consultants.html
> >>> >
> >>> > so, Rob, if you feel inclined to work on #1 and #2 from your
> suggestions
> >>> > above, please feel free to draft up something for us to review. Then
> >>> move
> >>> > on to #3?
> >>> >
> >>>
> >>> We might be able to jump directly to #3. We don't need to do #1 or #2
> >>> first.
> >>>
> >>> I've started to draft the "Distributor Best Practices" page here:
> >>>
> >>> http://www.openoffice.org/distribution/best-practices.html
> >>>
> >>
> >> ok, this looks pretty good...
> >>
> >>
> >>>
> >>> I think in the end we need three pages:
> >>>
> >>> 1) The main page, which is the listings page.
> >>>
> >>> 2) The Distributor Best Practices page
> >>>
> >>> 3) An instructions page for would-be distributors, of how to get
> >>> listed. It might grow over time to include links to ISO's, CD labels,
> >>> etc., in the future.
> >>>
> >>> These pages would be cross-linked.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> > So, we don't have to un-reroute what we've already done with the old
> >>> > distribution area, I'm inclined to put this new CD page(s) in bizdev
> >>> also.
> >>> >
> >>> > I'm hoping we can just implement this with xml and xslt. I'll do some
> >>> > testing in a day or so.
> >>> >
> >>>
> >>> That could be done now or later on. It is OK to start with a static
> >>> HTML page (not MDText) and prototype the design and even go live with
> >>> it, and then add the XSLT automation to generate it later. Depending
> >>> on the number of listings automation might not be needed.
> >>>
> >>> Do you want to mock up a distributor listings page?
> >>>
> >>
> >> Yes, I can do this over the next day or so I think. I just do up a
> static
> >> HTML as you suggest. Maybe like the old listing but without the region
> info
> >> -- to start.
> >>
> >>
> >> I started looking at some XML, and XSL just now, and well, not sure how
> >> this could be handled with the CMS vis a vis standard page headers etc.
> >> We could probaly define a "new" page type.
> >>
> >> For now, static HTML it is.
> >>
> >
> > OK, start here (revision of /distribution/index.html)
> >
> > http://www.openoffice.org/distribution/index_new.html
> >
>
> This is a good start.
>
> I wonder if the main page (index.html) should the end-user facing
> page, e.g., the distributor listings? And then have the FAQ be in
> distributor-faqs.html or something like that?
This might be a good idea. The main facing page IS a bit "preachy" I guess.
The legacy Distribution project's main index page was more like a
combination of the FAQ and "best practices" with links to CDs, etc. But if
we're only going to be dealing with CDs, no reason to keep that
organization, and it would probably be more friendly for users. (I have an
archive of the old /distribution/index.html).
> Not a big deal, just
> an idea. Do we know what existing incoming links from 3rd party
> websites point to?
I can't answer this one.
> (or even OO websites?)
Because "distribution" used to be a separate project, there are many links
to "distribution.openoffice.org" and a fair number JUST the cdrom area.
Whatever URL was used for
> the distributor list before should probably stay as the listing page.
> That way the existing links will still be accurate.
>
> http://www.openoffice.org/distribution/distributors.html
>
Since there were more than just CD vendors before, I think the page you
would want to keep the same would be:
/distribution/cdrom/sellers.html --and/or-- /distribution/cdrom/index.html
The two pages above are in my old archive and are practically identical.
I used this as kind of a template for:
http://www.openoffice.org/distribution/distributors.html
So... we could:
* replace the old sellers.html with the contents that is now in
http://www.openoffice.org/distribution/distributors.html
and make that the landing page
and, then have THAT link to the FAQ, and Best Practices which are locate in:
http://www.openoffice.org/distribution<http://www.openoffice.org/distribution/distributors.html>
I suggest we just leave the /distribution/index.html ( the FAQs) where
they are as there are some cases where links still exist to "
distribution.openoffice.org" so that would still resolve.
I guess we can discuss other matters once we get these moved where we want
them to eventually go.
> Instead of "Location"
I thought this was supposed to be where the company was located...
> maybe "Countries Served" or something like that.
> Or, in the application process we have a "data dictionary" that
> explains exactly what we want in each field. (I'm assuming that it
> would be common for someone in the US to be able to sent to Canada
> easily, and someone within the EU can cover more than one country if
> they want.
>
> "Additional Information"? I'd drop that unless we think it is really
> necessary. Otherwise it is easy for that to turn into an
> advertisement. Additional information can go on their website.
>
Maybe indicate if the medium is CD or DVD? And for what OS versions?
This might save users some clicks.
>
> > Mockups needing MUCH discussion I'm sure.
> >
>
> It is a good start. Maybe we iterate just a little bit more and then
> do the Call for Comments on the blog, so we can get some distributor
> and user views on this.
>
OK, I can start moving things around soonish.
>
> I'm also thinking that a CD label graphic from the project would be a
> very good thing. Almost every distributor would want one. We can
> avoid a lot of trademark use review requests if we have a label that
> can be used by listed distributors.
>
> -Rob
>
> >
> >>
> >>>
> >>> Regards,
> >>>
> >>> -Rob
> >>>
> >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> >>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >>
> >>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> MzK
> >>
> >> "Normal is not something to aspire to, it is something to get away
> from."
> >>
> >> -- Jodie Foster
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > MzK
> >
> > "Normal is not something to aspire to, it is something to get away from."
> >
> > -- Jodie Foster
>
>
>
> --
> Opinions expressed in this communication reflect the author's
> individual personal view, not necessarily that of an amorphous
> collective. The above statements do not reflect an official position
> of any organization, corporation, religion (organized or disorganized)
> or national football association. The contents of said note are not
> guaranteed to have been spell checked, grammar checked or reviewed for
> metrical infelicities. The contents of this post may not be suitable
> for those whose native language is not logic. Caution should be
> exercised when operating heavy machinery when reading this note, or
> even when not reading it. Seriously, heavy machinery is dangerous.
> Be careful.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
>
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MzK
"Normal is not something to aspire to, it is something to get away from."
-- Jodie Foster
Re: [DISCUSS] a new web area for Apache OpenOffice third party products
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Sun, Jun 16, 2013 at 5:38 PM, Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 14, 2013 at 4:11 PM, Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Jun 14, 2013 at 10:31 AM, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, Jun 14, 2013 at 12:14 PM, Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> .
>>> .
>>> .
>>>
>>> >>> >>> >
>>> >>> >>> > Levels in which we might do things:
>>> >>> >>> >
>>> >>> >>> > Level 1 -- Do nothing but watch for abuses. If someone wants to
>>> >>> sell
>>> >>> >>> > a CD, then they are free to do it, per the license. They can
>>> >>> >>> > advertise on eBay, their website, etc., but they have no
>>> permission
>>> >>> to
>>> >>> >>> > use the trademarks. Nothing special on our website.
>>> >>> >>> >
>>> >>> >>>
>>> >>> >>>
>>> >>> >>> >
>>> >>> >>> > Level 2 -- We allow a listing on our website (or wiki) of those
>>> who
>>> >>> >>> > offer CDs. But we make no attempt to verify anything. It is
>>> all
>>> >>> >>> > "caveat emptor". We put in disclaimers on the page so users
>>> know
>>> >>> that
>>> >>> >>> > we have not vetted anything.
>>> >>> >>> >
>>> >>> >>> > Level 3 -- We review requests for listing and approve them only
>>> if
>>> >>> >>> > they meet our qualifications, which might include proper use of
>>> >>> >>> > trademarks, a link back to our website, etc. This is similar to
>>> what
>>> >>> >>> > we did with consultants.
>>> >>> >>> >
>>> >>> >>> > Level 4 -- Like Level 3, but for those distributors who meet our
>>> >>> >>> > qualifications we offer a special logo they can use, something
>>> like
>>> >>> a
>>> >>> >>> > "Community Distributor".
>>> >>> >>> >
>>> .
>>> .
>>> .
>>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>
>>> > It seems there is at least some consensus of moving ahead with a CD
>>> vendor
>>> > page similar to the consultants page:
>>> >
>>> > http://www.openoffice.org/bizdev/consultants.html
>>> >
>>> > so, Rob, if you feel inclined to work on #1 and #2 from your suggestions
>>> > above, please feel free to draft up something for us to review. Then
>>> move
>>> > on to #3?
>>> >
>>>
>>> We might be able to jump directly to #3. We don't need to do #1 or #2
>>> first.
>>>
>>> I've started to draft the "Distributor Best Practices" page here:
>>>
>>> http://www.openoffice.org/distribution/best-practices.html
>>>
>>
>> ok, this looks pretty good...
>>
>>
>>>
>>> I think in the end we need three pages:
>>>
>>> 1) The main page, which is the listings page.
>>>
>>> 2) The Distributor Best Practices page
>>>
>>> 3) An instructions page for would-be distributors, of how to get
>>> listed. It might grow over time to include links to ISO's, CD labels,
>>> etc., in the future.
>>>
>>> These pages would be cross-linked.
>>>
>>>
>>> > So, we don't have to un-reroute what we've already done with the old
>>> > distribution area, I'm inclined to put this new CD page(s) in bizdev
>>> also.
>>> >
>>> > I'm hoping we can just implement this with xml and xslt. I'll do some
>>> > testing in a day or so.
>>> >
>>>
>>> That could be done now or later on. It is OK to start with a static
>>> HTML page (not MDText) and prototype the design and even go live with
>>> it, and then add the XSLT automation to generate it later. Depending
>>> on the number of listings automation might not be needed.
>>>
>>> Do you want to mock up a distributor listings page?
>>>
>>
>> Yes, I can do this over the next day or so I think. I just do up a static
>> HTML as you suggest. Maybe like the old listing but without the region info
>> -- to start.
>>
>>
>> I started looking at some XML, and XSL just now, and well, not sure how
>> this could be handled with the CMS vis a vis standard page headers etc.
>> We could probaly define a "new" page type.
>>
>> For now, static HTML it is.
>>
>
> OK, start here (revision of /distribution/index.html)
>
> http://www.openoffice.org/distribution/index_new.html
>
This is a good start.
I wonder if the main page (index.html) should the end-user facing
page, e.g., the distributor listings? And then have the FAQ be in
distributor-faqs.html or something like that? Not a big deal, just
an idea. Do we know what existing incoming links from 3rd party
websites point to? (or even OO websites?) Whatever URL was used for
the distributor list before should probably stay as the listing page.
That way the existing links will still be accurate.
http://www.openoffice.org/distribution/distributors.html
Instead of "Location" maybe "Countries Served" or something like that.
Or, in the application process we have a "data dictionary" that
explains exactly what we want in each field. (I'm assuming that it
would be common for someone in the US to be able to sent to Canada
easily, and someone within the EU can cover more than one country if
they want.
"Additional Information"? I'd drop that unless we think it is really
necessary. Otherwise it is easy for that to turn into an
advertisement. Additional information can go on their website.
> Mockups needing MUCH discussion I'm sure.
>
It is a good start. Maybe we iterate just a little bit more and then
do the Call for Comments on the blog, so we can get some distributor
and user views on this.
I'm also thinking that a CD label graphic from the project would be a
very good thing. Almost every distributor would want one. We can
avoid a lot of trademark use review requests if we have a label that
can be used by listed distributors.
-Rob
>
>>
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> -Rob
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> MzK
>>
>> "Normal is not something to aspire to, it is something to get away from."
>>
>> -- Jodie Foster
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> MzK
>
> "Normal is not something to aspire to, it is something to get away from."
>
> -- Jodie Foster
--
Opinions expressed in this communication reflect the author's
individual personal view, not necessarily that of an amorphous
collective. The above statements do not reflect an official position
of any organization, corporation, religion (organized or disorganized)
or national football association. The contents of said note are not
guaranteed to have been spell checked, grammar checked or reviewed for
metrical infelicities. The contents of this post may not be suitable
for those whose native language is not logic. Caution should be
exercised when operating heavy machinery when reading this note, or
even when not reading it. Seriously, heavy machinery is dangerous.
Be careful.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] a new web area for Apache OpenOffice third party products
Posted by Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com>.
On Fri, Jun 14, 2013 at 4:11 PM, Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, Jun 14, 2013 at 10:31 AM, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Jun 14, 2013 at 12:14 PM, Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> .
>> .
>> .
>>
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> > Levels in which we might do things:
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> > Level 1 -- Do nothing but watch for abuses. If someone wants to
>> >>> sell
>> >>> >>> > a CD, then they are free to do it, per the license. They can
>> >>> >>> > advertise on eBay, their website, etc., but they have no
>> permission
>> >>> to
>> >>> >>> > use the trademarks. Nothing special on our website.
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>>
>> >>> >>>
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> > Level 2 -- We allow a listing on our website (or wiki) of those
>> who
>> >>> >>> > offer CDs. But we make no attempt to verify anything. It is
>> all
>> >>> >>> > "caveat emptor". We put in disclaimers on the page so users
>> know
>> >>> that
>> >>> >>> > we have not vetted anything.
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> > Level 3 -- We review requests for listing and approve them only
>> if
>> >>> >>> > they meet our qualifications, which might include proper use of
>> >>> >>> > trademarks, a link back to our website, etc. This is similar to
>> what
>> >>> >>> > we did with consultants.
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> > Level 4 -- Like Level 3, but for those distributors who meet our
>> >>> >>> > qualifications we offer a special logo they can use, something
>> like
>> >>> a
>> >>> >>> > "Community Distributor".
>> >>> >>> >
>> .
>> .
>> .
>>
>> >>>
>> >>
>> > It seems there is at least some consensus of moving ahead with a CD
>> vendor
>> > page similar to the consultants page:
>> >
>> > http://www.openoffice.org/bizdev/consultants.html
>> >
>> > so, Rob, if you feel inclined to work on #1 and #2 from your suggestions
>> > above, please feel free to draft up something for us to review. Then
>> move
>> > on to #3?
>> >
>>
>> We might be able to jump directly to #3. We don't need to do #1 or #2
>> first.
>>
>> I've started to draft the "Distributor Best Practices" page here:
>>
>> http://www.openoffice.org/distribution/best-practices.html
>>
>
> ok, this looks pretty good...
>
>
>>
>> I think in the end we need three pages:
>>
>> 1) The main page, which is the listings page.
>>
>> 2) The Distributor Best Practices page
>>
>> 3) An instructions page for would-be distributors, of how to get
>> listed. It might grow over time to include links to ISO's, CD labels,
>> etc., in the future.
>>
>> These pages would be cross-linked.
>>
>>
>> > So, we don't have to un-reroute what we've already done with the old
>> > distribution area, I'm inclined to put this new CD page(s) in bizdev
>> also.
>> >
>> > I'm hoping we can just implement this with xml and xslt. I'll do some
>> > testing in a day or so.
>> >
>>
>> That could be done now or later on. It is OK to start with a static
>> HTML page (not MDText) and prototype the design and even go live with
>> it, and then add the XSLT automation to generate it later. Depending
>> on the number of listings automation might not be needed.
>>
>> Do you want to mock up a distributor listings page?
>>
>
> Yes, I can do this over the next day or so I think. I just do up a static
> HTML as you suggest. Maybe like the old listing but without the region info
> -- to start.
>
>
> I started looking at some XML, and XSL just now, and well, not sure how
> this could be handled with the CMS vis a vis standard page headers etc.
> We could probaly define a "new" page type.
>
> For now, static HTML it is.
>
OK, start here (revision of /distribution/index.html)
http://www.openoffice.org/distribution/index_new.html
Mockups needing MUCH discussion I'm sure.
>
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> -Rob
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>
>>
>
>
> --
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> MzK
>
> "Normal is not something to aspire to, it is something to get away from."
>
> -- Jodie Foster
>
>
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MzK
"Normal is not something to aspire to, it is something to get away from."
-- Jodie Foster
Re: [DISCUSS] a new web area for Apache OpenOffice third party products
Posted by Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com>.
On Fri, Jun 14, 2013 at 10:31 AM, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 14, 2013 at 12:14 PM, Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
> .
> .
> .
>
> >>> >>> >
> >>> >>> > Levels in which we might do things:
> >>> >>> >
> >>> >>> > Level 1 -- Do nothing but watch for abuses. If someone wants to
> >>> sell
> >>> >>> > a CD, then they are free to do it, per the license. They can
> >>> >>> > advertise on eBay, their website, etc., but they have no
> permission
> >>> to
> >>> >>> > use the trademarks. Nothing special on our website.
> >>> >>> >
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>> >
> >>> >>> > Level 2 -- We allow a listing on our website (or wiki) of those
> who
> >>> >>> > offer CDs. But we make no attempt to verify anything. It is all
> >>> >>> > "caveat emptor". We put in disclaimers on the page so users know
> >>> that
> >>> >>> > we have not vetted anything.
> >>> >>> >
> >>> >>> > Level 3 -- We review requests for listing and approve them only
> if
> >>> >>> > they meet our qualifications, which might include proper use of
> >>> >>> > trademarks, a link back to our website, etc. This is similar to
> what
> >>> >>> > we did with consultants.
> >>> >>> >
> >>> >>> > Level 4 -- Like Level 3, but for those distributors who meet our
> >>> >>> > qualifications we offer a special logo they can use, something
> like
> >>> a
> >>> >>> > "Community Distributor".
> >>> >>> >
> .
> .
> .
>
> >>>
> >>
> > It seems there is at least some consensus of moving ahead with a CD
> vendor
> > page similar to the consultants page:
> >
> > http://www.openoffice.org/bizdev/consultants.html
> >
> > so, Rob, if you feel inclined to work on #1 and #2 from your suggestions
> > above, please feel free to draft up something for us to review. Then move
> > on to #3?
> >
>
> We might be able to jump directly to #3. We don't need to do #1 or #2
> first.
>
> I've started to draft the "Distributor Best Practices" page here:
>
> http://www.openoffice.org/distribution/best-practices.html
>
ok, this looks pretty good...
>
> I think in the end we need three pages:
>
> 1) The main page, which is the listings page.
>
> 2) The Distributor Best Practices page
>
> 3) An instructions page for would-be distributors, of how to get
> listed. It might grow over time to include links to ISO's, CD labels,
> etc., in the future.
>
> These pages would be cross-linked.
>
>
> > So, we don't have to un-reroute what we've already done with the old
> > distribution area, I'm inclined to put this new CD page(s) in bizdev
> also.
> >
> > I'm hoping we can just implement this with xml and xslt. I'll do some
> > testing in a day or so.
> >
>
> That could be done now or later on. It is OK to start with a static
> HTML page (not MDText) and prototype the design and even go live with
> it, and then add the XSLT automation to generate it later. Depending
> on the number of listings automation might not be needed.
>
> Do you want to mock up a distributor listings page?
>
Yes, I can do this over the next day or so I think. I just do up a static
HTML as you suggest. Maybe like the old listing but without the region info
-- to start.
I started looking at some XML, and XSL just now, and well, not sure how
this could be handled with the CMS vis a vis standard page headers etc.
We could probaly define a "new" page type.
For now, static HTML it is.
>
> Regards,
>
> -Rob
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
>
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MzK
"Normal is not something to aspire to, it is something to get away from."
-- Jodie Foster
Re: [DISCUSS] a new web area for Apache OpenOffice third party products
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Fri, Jun 14, 2013 at 12:14 PM, Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
.
.
.
>>> >>> >
>>> >>> > Levels in which we might do things:
>>> >>> >
>>> >>> > Level 1 -- Do nothing but watch for abuses. If someone wants to
>>> sell
>>> >>> > a CD, then they are free to do it, per the license. They can
>>> >>> > advertise on eBay, their website, etc., but they have no permission
>>> to
>>> >>> > use the trademarks. Nothing special on our website.
>>> >>> >
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>> >
>>> >>> > Level 2 -- We allow a listing on our website (or wiki) of those who
>>> >>> > offer CDs. But we make no attempt to verify anything. It is all
>>> >>> > "caveat emptor". We put in disclaimers on the page so users know
>>> that
>>> >>> > we have not vetted anything.
>>> >>> >
>>> >>> > Level 3 -- We review requests for listing and approve them only if
>>> >>> > they meet our qualifications, which might include proper use of
>>> >>> > trademarks, a link back to our website, etc. This is similar to what
>>> >>> > we did with consultants.
>>> >>> >
>>> >>> > Level 4 -- Like Level 3, but for those distributors who meet our
>>> >>> > qualifications we offer a special logo they can use, something like
>>> a
>>> >>> > "Community Distributor".
>>> >>> >
.
.
.
>>>
>>
> It seems there is at least some consensus of moving ahead with a CD vendor
> page similar to the consultants page:
>
> http://www.openoffice.org/bizdev/consultants.html
>
> so, Rob, if you feel inclined to work on #1 and #2 from your suggestions
> above, please feel free to draft up something for us to review. Then move
> on to #3?
>
We might be able to jump directly to #3. We don't need to do #1 or #2 first.
I've started to draft the "Distributor Best Practices" page here:
http://www.openoffice.org/distribution/best-practices.html
I think in the end we need three pages:
1) The main page, which is the listings page.
2) The Distributor Best Practices page
3) An instructions page for would-be distributors, of how to get
listed. It might grow over time to include links to ISO's, CD labels,
etc., in the future.
These pages would be cross-linked.
> So, we don't have to un-reroute what we've already done with the old
> distribution area, I'm inclined to put this new CD page(s) in bizdev also.
>
> I'm hoping we can just implement this with xml and xslt. I'll do some
> testing in a day or so.
>
That could be done now or later on. It is OK to start with a static
HTML page (not MDText) and prototype the design and even go live with
it, and then add the XSLT automation to generate it later. Depending
on the number of listings automation might not be needed.
Do you want to mock up a distributor listings page?
Regards,
-Rob
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] a new web area for Apache OpenOffice third party products
Posted by Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com>.
On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 4:15 PM, Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 3:52 PM, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 1:04 PM, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
>> > On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 12:34 PM, Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> >> On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 8:52 AM, janI <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> On 11 June 2013 16:01, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> > On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 8:19 PM, Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com>
>> >>> wrote:
>> >>> > > We used to have the old Distribution project that for the most
>> part has
>> >>> > > been revised to a very minimal presence...
>> >>> > > http://www.openoffice.org/distribution/
>> >>> > >
>> >>> > > Recently, there seems to be a renewed interest in posting
>> information
>> >>> > > about new and former Apache OpenOffice distribution outlets --
>> notably
>> >>> > > CD/DVD sets. And old page containing CD/DVD vendors still exists
>> but
>> >>> is
>> >>> > > not linked in any place. Since /distribution/cdrom/sellers.html is
>> >>> > > redirected because of changes to this area, you can see and
>> download
>> >>> the
>> >>> > > old page from svn:
>> >>> > >
>> >>> > >
>> >>> >
>> >>>
>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/openoffice/ooo-site/trunk/content/distribution/cdrom/sellers.html?view=log
>> >>> > >
>> >>> > > Are we interested in reviving this listing, or something similar
>> to it?
>> >>> > > Pros...Cons, etc.
>> >>> > >
>> >>> >
>> >>> > Looking at queries on the mailing list, forums, etc., we don't get a
>> >>> > lot of people asking for CDs. Maybe 15 or 20 in the last year, yes?
>> >>> > Compare that to over 50 million downloads. So I don't think this is
>> >>> > critical, but no objections to having such a list.
>> >>> >
>> >>> > On the other hand, unless the page is very prominently linked, like
>> >>> > from our home page, I doubt the casual user will find it. And if
>> >>> > someone wants to buy a CD it is easy to just type "buy openoffice
>> cd"
>> >>> > into a search engine and see places where you can buy a CD,
>> including
>> >>> > Amazon, etc. In some sense Google and Bing are better at helping
>> >>> > users find information than we are, even when that information is on
>> >>> > our own website!
>> >>> >
>> >>>
>> >>> +1 to make a prominent third party site in different languages, linked
>> >>> directly from our top pages, that way google spider will catch the
>> third
>> >>> party product hotter than otherwise.
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> >
>> >>> > > A new listing would not have to be by region as this old one is.
>> Given
>> >>> > > update issues in the past, if we provided a new listing page, we
>> would
>> >>> > > likely need disclaimers regarding: accuracy, support, relation to
>> >>> Apache
>> >>> > > OpenOffice(this project), etc.
>> >>> > >
>> >>> > > As with all our web pages, we could accept additions though the
>> CMS
>> >>> from
>> >>> > > non-commtters.
>> >>> > >
>> >>> >
>> >>> > Levels in which we might do things:
>> >>> >
>> >>> > Level 1 -- Do nothing but watch for abuses. If someone wants to
>> sell
>> >>> > a CD, then they are free to do it, per the license. They can
>> >>> > advertise on eBay, their website, etc., but they have no permission
>> to
>> >>> > use the trademarks. Nothing special on our website.
>> >>> >
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> >
>> >>> > Level 2 -- We allow a listing on our website (or wiki) of those who
>> >>> > offer CDs. But we make no attempt to verify anything. It is all
>> >>> > "caveat emptor". We put in disclaimers on the page so users know
>> that
>> >>> > we have not vetted anything.
>> >>> >
>> >>> > Level 3 -- We review requests for listing and approve them only if
>> >>> > they meet our qualifications, which might include proper use of
>> >>> > trademarks, a link back to our website, etc. This is similar to what
>> >>> > we did with consultants.
>> >>> >
>> >>> > Level 4 -- Like Level 3, but for those distributors who meet our
>> >>> > qualifications we offer a special logo they can use, something like
>> a
>> >>> > "Community Distributor".
>> >>> >
>> >>> > Personally, I think Level 1 is fine. But Level 2 doesn't really
>> help
>> >>> > our users. We'd be offering placement on our website to vendors
>> >>> > without really getting anything in return. So I think we want
>> >>> > something like Level 3 or Level 4, where we promote the public good
>> by
>> >>> > reviewing and approving the listings that meeting reasonable
>> criteria.
>> >>> >
>> >>> I think we should aim at 3), and while we are getting a new logo
>> consider
>> >>> 4), which I think is the best.
>> >>>
>> >>> rgds
>> >>> jan I.
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >> I know we don't get MANY requests for CDs but we seem to get enough
>> from
>> >> frustrated users to warrant attention to this in my opinion. And, it
>> would
>> >> encourage entities that might want to engage in this form of
>> assistance.
>> >>
>> >> Level 2 is certainly an easy implementation but I don't know how well
>> this
>> >> would play out.
>> >>
>> >> I think we should make Level 3 a goal, as we did with the consultants.
>> I
>> >> would be happy to start on this path if we have enough agreement here.
>> >> Right now, I don't think we would have many entries, but having this
>> would
>> >> help. It would probably not be feasible to review all contents but
>> >> certainly trademark issues.
>> >>
>> >
>> > In particular it is not really feasible for us to review the actual
>> > CD, which is probably the most important thing.
>> >
>> > However, instead of a review we could simply ask distributors to agree
>> > to self-certify to some best practices, and get them to publicly agree
>> > to these guidelines. That way we can put a disclaimer like:
>> >
>> > "Apache OpenOffice is always available for download free from our
>> > website (link), but as a service to users who may require a physical
>> > CD we provide this of independent vendors who offer Apache OpenOffice
>> > on CD. These vendors are not endorsed by or affiliated with the
>> > Apache OpenOffice project, but each vendor has agreed to follow our
>> > Best Practices for OpenOffice CD Vendors (link)."
>> >
>>
>> Just thinking ahead a little. If there is consensus that we want
>> something like "Level 3", then next steps might be:
>>
>> 1) Draft a "Best Practices for OpenOffice CD Vendors" on the wiki
>>
>> 2) Draft an example of a few listings to show how they would look
>>
>> 3) Blog post, a "Call for Comments" on this program. It would be
>> good to get feedback from CD distributors as well as users, to confirm
>> the approach.
>>
>> 4) Go live.
>>
>> This should not take too long I can help with some of this.
>
> The goal
>> should be (I'll suggest) to have this ready for AOO 4.0 release, so CD
>> vendors can start distributing shortly after release. In other words,
>> we don't want a backlog of vendors asking for listing at the time we
>> release.
>>
>> -Rob
>>
>
It seems there is at least some consensus of moving ahead with a CD vendor
page similar to the consultants page:
http://www.openoffice.org/bizdev/consultants.html
so, Rob, if you feel inclined to work on #1 and #2 from your suggestions
above, please feel free to draft up something for us to review. Then move
on to #3?
So, we don't have to un-reroute what we've already done with the old
distribution area, I'm inclined to put this new CD page(s) in bizdev also.
I'm hoping we can just implement this with xml and xslt. I'll do some
testing in a day or so.
re other comments regarding checksums in the related conversation:
http://markmail.org/message/6el3jxmfvbhijezb
Scripting possibilities need to be researched. Any volunteers?
>>
> These actions would be very helpful for the project and any vendor wishing
> to receive a listing, and reassuring for people who would be interested in
> having the CDs.
>
> Yes, having this new area ready a bit before the 4.0 would be a good move
> as well.
>
> Any help appreciated of course.
>
> Well maybe give this discussion until the end of Friday, and we can move
> on from here.
>
>
>
>> > Regards,
>> >
>> > -Rob
>> >
>> >
>> >> I definitely like the idea of translations for the other language
>> areas --
>> >> I would assume we would take entries from one area -- English -- but
>> the
>> >> contents of the results page would be translated? Something to work on
>> down
>> >> the road.
>> >>
>> >> Level 4 is a great idea as well.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>> >
>> >>> > Criteria might include (and this has been discussed in some older
>> >>> threads):
>> >>> >
>> >>> > 1) Proper acknowledgements of trademarks
>> >>> >
>> >>> > 2) Link back to www.openoffice.org
>> >>> >
>> >>> > 3) Distributes the most-recent version of AOO (within some time
>> period
>> >>> > after a new release)
>> >>> >
>> >>> > 4) Makes it clear that any charge is for the media and convenience,
>> >>> > not for the underlying AOO software
>> >>> >
>> >>> > Stuff like that. This could be in the form of an agreement that the
>> >>> > distributor signs off on.
>> >>> >
>> >>> > Regards,
>> >>> >
>> >>> > -Rob
>> >>> >
>> >>> >
>> >>> > >
>> >>> > > --
>> >>> > >
>> >>> >
>> >>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >>> > > MzK
>> >>> > >
>> >>> > > "You can't believe one thing and do another.
>> >>> > > What you believe and what you do are the same thing."
>> >>> > > -- Leonard Peltier
>> >>> >
>> >>> >
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >>> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>> >>> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>> >>> >
>> >>> >
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >> MzK
>> >>
>> >> "You can't believe one thing and do another.
>> >> What you believe and what you do are the same thing."
>> >> -- Leonard Peltier
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>
>>
>
>
> --
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> MzK
>
> "You can't believe one thing and do another.
> What you believe and what you do are the same thing."
> -- Leonard Peltier
>
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MzK
"Normal is not something to aspire to, it is something to get away from."
-- Jodie Foster
Re: [DISCUSS] a new web area for Apache OpenOffice third party products
Posted by Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com>.
On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 3:52 PM, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 1:04 PM, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 12:34 PM, Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >> On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 8:52 AM, janI <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> >>
> >>> On 11 June 2013 16:01, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> > On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 8:19 PM, Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>> > > We used to have the old Distribution project that for the most
> part has
> >>> > > been revised to a very minimal presence...
> >>> > > http://www.openoffice.org/distribution/
> >>> > >
> >>> > > Recently, there seems to be a renewed interest in posting
> information
> >>> > > about new and former Apache OpenOffice distribution outlets --
> notably
> >>> > > CD/DVD sets. And old page containing CD/DVD vendors still exists
> but
> >>> is
> >>> > > not linked in any place. Since /distribution/cdrom/sellers.html is
> >>> > > redirected because of changes to this area, you can see and
> download
> >>> the
> >>> > > old page from svn:
> >>> > >
> >>> > >
> >>> >
> >>>
> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/openoffice/ooo-site/trunk/content/distribution/cdrom/sellers.html?view=log
> >>> > >
> >>> > > Are we interested in reviving this listing, or something similar
> to it?
> >>> > > Pros...Cons, etc.
> >>> > >
> >>> >
> >>> > Looking at queries on the mailing list, forums, etc., we don't get a
> >>> > lot of people asking for CDs. Maybe 15 or 20 in the last year, yes?
> >>> > Compare that to over 50 million downloads. So I don't think this is
> >>> > critical, but no objections to having such a list.
> >>> >
> >>> > On the other hand, unless the page is very prominently linked, like
> >>> > from our home page, I doubt the casual user will find it. And if
> >>> > someone wants to buy a CD it is easy to just type "buy openoffice cd"
> >>> > into a search engine and see places where you can buy a CD, including
> >>> > Amazon, etc. In some sense Google and Bing are better at helping
> >>> > users find information than we are, even when that information is on
> >>> > our own website!
> >>> >
> >>>
> >>> +1 to make a prominent third party site in different languages, linked
> >>> directly from our top pages, that way google spider will catch the
> third
> >>> party product hotter than otherwise.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> >
> >>> > > A new listing would not have to be by region as this old one is.
> Given
> >>> > > update issues in the past, if we provided a new listing page, we
> would
> >>> > > likely need disclaimers regarding: accuracy, support, relation to
> >>> Apache
> >>> > > OpenOffice(this project), etc.
> >>> > >
> >>> > > As with all our web pages, we could accept additions though the CMS
> >>> from
> >>> > > non-commtters.
> >>> > >
> >>> >
> >>> > Levels in which we might do things:
> >>> >
> >>> > Level 1 -- Do nothing but watch for abuses. If someone wants to sell
> >>> > a CD, then they are free to do it, per the license. They can
> >>> > advertise on eBay, their website, etc., but they have no permission
> to
> >>> > use the trademarks. Nothing special on our website.
> >>> >
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> >
> >>> > Level 2 -- We allow a listing on our website (or wiki) of those who
> >>> > offer CDs. But we make no attempt to verify anything. It is all
> >>> > "caveat emptor". We put in disclaimers on the page so users know
> that
> >>> > we have not vetted anything.
> >>> >
> >>> > Level 3 -- We review requests for listing and approve them only if
> >>> > they meet our qualifications, which might include proper use of
> >>> > trademarks, a link back to our website, etc. This is similar to what
> >>> > we did with consultants.
> >>> >
> >>> > Level 4 -- Like Level 3, but for those distributors who meet our
> >>> > qualifications we offer a special logo they can use, something like a
> >>> > "Community Distributor".
> >>> >
> >>> > Personally, I think Level 1 is fine. But Level 2 doesn't really help
> >>> > our users. We'd be offering placement on our website to vendors
> >>> > without really getting anything in return. So I think we want
> >>> > something like Level 3 or Level 4, where we promote the public good
> by
> >>> > reviewing and approving the listings that meeting reasonable
> criteria.
> >>> >
> >>> I think we should aim at 3), and while we are getting a new logo
> consider
> >>> 4), which I think is the best.
> >>>
> >>> rgds
> >>> jan I.
> >>>
> >>
> >> I know we don't get MANY requests for CDs but we seem to get enough from
> >> frustrated users to warrant attention to this in my opinion. And, it
> would
> >> encourage entities that might want to engage in this form of assistance.
> >>
> >> Level 2 is certainly an easy implementation but I don't know how well
> this
> >> would play out.
> >>
> >> I think we should make Level 3 a goal, as we did with the consultants. I
> >> would be happy to start on this path if we have enough agreement here.
> >> Right now, I don't think we would have many entries, but having this
> would
> >> help. It would probably not be feasible to review all contents but
> >> certainly trademark issues.
> >>
> >
> > In particular it is not really feasible for us to review the actual
> > CD, which is probably the most important thing.
> >
> > However, instead of a review we could simply ask distributors to agree
> > to self-certify to some best practices, and get them to publicly agree
> > to these guidelines. That way we can put a disclaimer like:
> >
> > "Apache OpenOffice is always available for download free from our
> > website (link), but as a service to users who may require a physical
> > CD we provide this of independent vendors who offer Apache OpenOffice
> > on CD. These vendors are not endorsed by or affiliated with the
> > Apache OpenOffice project, but each vendor has agreed to follow our
> > Best Practices for OpenOffice CD Vendors (link)."
> >
>
> Just thinking ahead a little. If there is consensus that we want
> something like "Level 3", then next steps might be:
>
> 1) Draft a "Best Practices for OpenOffice CD Vendors" on the wiki
>
> 2) Draft an example of a few listings to show how they would look
>
> 3) Blog post, a "Call for Comments" on this program. It would be
> good to get feedback from CD distributors as well as users, to confirm
> the approach.
>
> 4) Go live.
>
> This should not take too long I can help with some of this. The goal
> should be (I'll suggest) to have this ready for AOO 4.0 release, so CD
> vendors can start distributing shortly after release. In other words,
> we don't want a backlog of vendors asking for listing at the time we
> release.
>
> -Rob
>
>
These actions would be very helpful for the project and any vendor wishing
to receive a listing, and reassuring for people who would be interested in
having the CDs.
Yes, having this new area ready a bit before the 4.0 would be a good move
as well.
Any help appreciated of course.
Well maybe give this discussion until the end of Friday, and we can move on
from here.
> > Regards,
> >
> > -Rob
> >
> >
> >> I definitely like the idea of translations for the other language areas
> --
> >> I would assume we would take entries from one area -- English -- but the
> >> contents of the results page would be translated? Something to work on
> down
> >> the road.
> >>
> >> Level 4 is a great idea as well.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>> >
> >>> > Criteria might include (and this has been discussed in some older
> >>> threads):
> >>> >
> >>> > 1) Proper acknowledgements of trademarks
> >>> >
> >>> > 2) Link back to www.openoffice.org
> >>> >
> >>> > 3) Distributes the most-recent version of AOO (within some time
> period
> >>> > after a new release)
> >>> >
> >>> > 4) Makes it clear that any charge is for the media and convenience,
> >>> > not for the underlying AOO software
> >>> >
> >>> > Stuff like that. This could be in the form of an agreement that the
> >>> > distributor signs off on.
> >>> >
> >>> > Regards,
> >>> >
> >>> > -Rob
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> > >
> >>> > > --
> >>> > >
> >>> >
> >>>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>> > > MzK
> >>> > >
> >>> > > "You can't believe one thing and do another.
> >>> > > What you believe and what you do are the same thing."
> >>> > > -- Leonard Peltier
> >>> >
> >>> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> >>> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> MzK
> >>
> >> "You can't believe one thing and do another.
> >> What you believe and what you do are the same thing."
> >> -- Leonard Peltier
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
>
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MzK
"You can't believe one thing and do another.
What you believe and what you do are the same thing."
-- Leonard Peltier
Re: [DISCUSS] a new web area for Apache OpenOffice third party products
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 1:04 PM, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 12:34 PM, Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 8:52 AM, janI <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>>> On 11 June 2013 16:01, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> > On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 8:19 PM, Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> > > We used to have the old Distribution project that for the most part has
>>> > > been revised to a very minimal presence...
>>> > > http://www.openoffice.org/distribution/
>>> > >
>>> > > Recently, there seems to be a renewed interest in posting information
>>> > > about new and former Apache OpenOffice distribution outlets -- notably
>>> > > CD/DVD sets. And old page containing CD/DVD vendors still exists but
>>> is
>>> > > not linked in any place. Since /distribution/cdrom/sellers.html is
>>> > > redirected because of changes to this area, you can see and download
>>> the
>>> > > old page from svn:
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> >
>>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/openoffice/ooo-site/trunk/content/distribution/cdrom/sellers.html?view=log
>>> > >
>>> > > Are we interested in reviving this listing, or something similar to it?
>>> > > Pros...Cons, etc.
>>> > >
>>> >
>>> > Looking at queries on the mailing list, forums, etc., we don't get a
>>> > lot of people asking for CDs. Maybe 15 or 20 in the last year, yes?
>>> > Compare that to over 50 million downloads. So I don't think this is
>>> > critical, but no objections to having such a list.
>>> >
>>> > On the other hand, unless the page is very prominently linked, like
>>> > from our home page, I doubt the casual user will find it. And if
>>> > someone wants to buy a CD it is easy to just type "buy openoffice cd"
>>> > into a search engine and see places where you can buy a CD, including
>>> > Amazon, etc. In some sense Google and Bing are better at helping
>>> > users find information than we are, even when that information is on
>>> > our own website!
>>> >
>>>
>>> +1 to make a prominent third party site in different languages, linked
>>> directly from our top pages, that way google spider will catch the third
>>> party product hotter than otherwise.
>>>
>>>
>>> >
>>> > > A new listing would not have to be by region as this old one is. Given
>>> > > update issues in the past, if we provided a new listing page, we would
>>> > > likely need disclaimers regarding: accuracy, support, relation to
>>> Apache
>>> > > OpenOffice(this project), etc.
>>> > >
>>> > > As with all our web pages, we could accept additions though the CMS
>>> from
>>> > > non-commtters.
>>> > >
>>> >
>>> > Levels in which we might do things:
>>> >
>>> > Level 1 -- Do nothing but watch for abuses. If someone wants to sell
>>> > a CD, then they are free to do it, per the license. They can
>>> > advertise on eBay, their website, etc., but they have no permission to
>>> > use the trademarks. Nothing special on our website.
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>> >
>>> > Level 2 -- We allow a listing on our website (or wiki) of those who
>>> > offer CDs. But we make no attempt to verify anything. It is all
>>> > "caveat emptor". We put in disclaimers on the page so users know that
>>> > we have not vetted anything.
>>> >
>>> > Level 3 -- We review requests for listing and approve them only if
>>> > they meet our qualifications, which might include proper use of
>>> > trademarks, a link back to our website, etc. This is similar to what
>>> > we did with consultants.
>>> >
>>> > Level 4 -- Like Level 3, but for those distributors who meet our
>>> > qualifications we offer a special logo they can use, something like a
>>> > "Community Distributor".
>>> >
>>> > Personally, I think Level 1 is fine. But Level 2 doesn't really help
>>> > our users. We'd be offering placement on our website to vendors
>>> > without really getting anything in return. So I think we want
>>> > something like Level 3 or Level 4, where we promote the public good by
>>> > reviewing and approving the listings that meeting reasonable criteria.
>>> >
>>> I think we should aim at 3), and while we are getting a new logo consider
>>> 4), which I think is the best.
>>>
>>> rgds
>>> jan I.
>>>
>>
>> I know we don't get MANY requests for CDs but we seem to get enough from
>> frustrated users to warrant attention to this in my opinion. And, it would
>> encourage entities that might want to engage in this form of assistance.
>>
>> Level 2 is certainly an easy implementation but I don't know how well this
>> would play out.
>>
>> I think we should make Level 3 a goal, as we did with the consultants. I
>> would be happy to start on this path if we have enough agreement here.
>> Right now, I don't think we would have many entries, but having this would
>> help. It would probably not be feasible to review all contents but
>> certainly trademark issues.
>>
>
> In particular it is not really feasible for us to review the actual
> CD, which is probably the most important thing.
>
> However, instead of a review we could simply ask distributors to agree
> to self-certify to some best practices, and get them to publicly agree
> to these guidelines. That way we can put a disclaimer like:
>
> "Apache OpenOffice is always available for download free from our
> website (link), but as a service to users who may require a physical
> CD we provide this of independent vendors who offer Apache OpenOffice
> on CD. These vendors are not endorsed by or affiliated with the
> Apache OpenOffice project, but each vendor has agreed to follow our
> Best Practices for OpenOffice CD Vendors (link)."
>
Just thinking ahead a little. If there is consensus that we want
something like "Level 3", then next steps might be:
1) Draft a "Best Practices for OpenOffice CD Vendors" on the wiki
2) Draft an example of a few listings to show how they would look
3) Blog post, a "Call for Comments" on this program. It would be
good to get feedback from CD distributors as well as users, to confirm
the approach.
4) Go live.
This should not take too long I can help with some of this. The goal
should be (I'll suggest) to have this ready for AOO 4.0 release, so CD
vendors can start distributing shortly after release. In other words,
we don't want a backlog of vendors asking for listing at the time we
release.
-Rob
> Regards,
>
> -Rob
>
>
>> I definitely like the idea of translations for the other language areas --
>> I would assume we would take entries from one area -- English -- but the
>> contents of the results page would be translated? Something to work on down
>> the road.
>>
>> Level 4 is a great idea as well.
>>
>>
>>
>>> >
>>> > Criteria might include (and this has been discussed in some older
>>> threads):
>>> >
>>> > 1) Proper acknowledgements of trademarks
>>> >
>>> > 2) Link back to www.openoffice.org
>>> >
>>> > 3) Distributes the most-recent version of AOO (within some time period
>>> > after a new release)
>>> >
>>> > 4) Makes it clear that any charge is for the media and convenience,
>>> > not for the underlying AOO software
>>> >
>>> > Stuff like that. This could be in the form of an agreement that the
>>> > distributor signs off on.
>>> >
>>> > Regards,
>>> >
>>> > -Rob
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > >
>>> > > --
>>> > >
>>> >
>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> > > MzK
>>> > >
>>> > > "You can't believe one thing and do another.
>>> > > What you believe and what you do are the same thing."
>>> > > -- Leonard Peltier
>>> >
>>> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>>> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>> >
>>> >
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> MzK
>>
>> "You can't believe one thing and do another.
>> What you believe and what you do are the same thing."
>> -- Leonard Peltier
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] a new web area for Apache OpenOffice third party products
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 12:34 PM, Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 8:52 AM, janI <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> On 11 June 2013 16:01, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>> > On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 8:19 PM, Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > > We used to have the old Distribution project that for the most part has
>> > > been revised to a very minimal presence...
>> > > http://www.openoffice.org/distribution/
>> > >
>> > > Recently, there seems to be a renewed interest in posting information
>> > > about new and former Apache OpenOffice distribution outlets -- notably
>> > > CD/DVD sets. And old page containing CD/DVD vendors still exists but
>> is
>> > > not linked in any place. Since /distribution/cdrom/sellers.html is
>> > > redirected because of changes to this area, you can see and download
>> the
>> > > old page from svn:
>> > >
>> > >
>> >
>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/openoffice/ooo-site/trunk/content/distribution/cdrom/sellers.html?view=log
>> > >
>> > > Are we interested in reviving this listing, or something similar to it?
>> > > Pros...Cons, etc.
>> > >
>> >
>> > Looking at queries on the mailing list, forums, etc., we don't get a
>> > lot of people asking for CDs. Maybe 15 or 20 in the last year, yes?
>> > Compare that to over 50 million downloads. So I don't think this is
>> > critical, but no objections to having such a list.
>> >
>> > On the other hand, unless the page is very prominently linked, like
>> > from our home page, I doubt the casual user will find it. And if
>> > someone wants to buy a CD it is easy to just type "buy openoffice cd"
>> > into a search engine and see places where you can buy a CD, including
>> > Amazon, etc. In some sense Google and Bing are better at helping
>> > users find information than we are, even when that information is on
>> > our own website!
>> >
>>
>> +1 to make a prominent third party site in different languages, linked
>> directly from our top pages, that way google spider will catch the third
>> party product hotter than otherwise.
>>
>>
>> >
>> > > A new listing would not have to be by region as this old one is. Given
>> > > update issues in the past, if we provided a new listing page, we would
>> > > likely need disclaimers regarding: accuracy, support, relation to
>> Apache
>> > > OpenOffice(this project), etc.
>> > >
>> > > As with all our web pages, we could accept additions though the CMS
>> from
>> > > non-commtters.
>> > >
>> >
>> > Levels in which we might do things:
>> >
>> > Level 1 -- Do nothing but watch for abuses. If someone wants to sell
>> > a CD, then they are free to do it, per the license. They can
>> > advertise on eBay, their website, etc., but they have no permission to
>> > use the trademarks. Nothing special on our website.
>> >
>>
>>
>> >
>> > Level 2 -- We allow a listing on our website (or wiki) of those who
>> > offer CDs. But we make no attempt to verify anything. It is all
>> > "caveat emptor". We put in disclaimers on the page so users know that
>> > we have not vetted anything.
>> >
>> > Level 3 -- We review requests for listing and approve them only if
>> > they meet our qualifications, which might include proper use of
>> > trademarks, a link back to our website, etc. This is similar to what
>> > we did with consultants.
>> >
>> > Level 4 -- Like Level 3, but for those distributors who meet our
>> > qualifications we offer a special logo they can use, something like a
>> > "Community Distributor".
>> >
>> > Personally, I think Level 1 is fine. But Level 2 doesn't really help
>> > our users. We'd be offering placement on our website to vendors
>> > without really getting anything in return. So I think we want
>> > something like Level 3 or Level 4, where we promote the public good by
>> > reviewing and approving the listings that meeting reasonable criteria.
>> >
>> I think we should aim at 3), and while we are getting a new logo consider
>> 4), which I think is the best.
>>
>> rgds
>> jan I.
>>
>
> I know we don't get MANY requests for CDs but we seem to get enough from
> frustrated users to warrant attention to this in my opinion. And, it would
> encourage entities that might want to engage in this form of assistance.
>
> Level 2 is certainly an easy implementation but I don't know how well this
> would play out.
>
> I think we should make Level 3 a goal, as we did with the consultants. I
> would be happy to start on this path if we have enough agreement here.
> Right now, I don't think we would have many entries, but having this would
> help. It would probably not be feasible to review all contents but
> certainly trademark issues.
>
In particular it is not really feasible for us to review the actual
CD, which is probably the most important thing.
However, instead of a review we could simply ask distributors to agree
to self-certify to some best practices, and get them to publicly agree
to these guidelines. That way we can put a disclaimer like:
"Apache OpenOffice is always available for download free from our
website (link), but as a service to users who may require a physical
CD we provide this of independent vendors who offer Apache OpenOffice
on CD. These vendors are not endorsed by or affiliated with the
Apache OpenOffice project, but each vendor has agreed to follow our
Best Practices for OpenOffice CD Vendors (link)."
Regards,
-Rob
> I definitely like the idea of translations for the other language areas --
> I would assume we would take entries from one area -- English -- but the
> contents of the results page would be translated? Something to work on down
> the road.
>
> Level 4 is a great idea as well.
>
>
>
>> >
>> > Criteria might include (and this has been discussed in some older
>> threads):
>> >
>> > 1) Proper acknowledgements of trademarks
>> >
>> > 2) Link back to www.openoffice.org
>> >
>> > 3) Distributes the most-recent version of AOO (within some time period
>> > after a new release)
>> >
>> > 4) Makes it clear that any charge is for the media and convenience,
>> > not for the underlying AOO software
>> >
>> > Stuff like that. This could be in the form of an agreement that the
>> > distributor signs off on.
>> >
>> > Regards,
>> >
>> > -Rob
>> >
>> >
>> > >
>> > > --
>> > >
>> >
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > > MzK
>> > >
>> > > "You can't believe one thing and do another.
>> > > What you believe and what you do are the same thing."
>> > > -- Leonard Peltier
>> >
>> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>> >
>> >
>>
>
>
>
> --
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> MzK
>
> "You can't believe one thing and do another.
> What you believe and what you do are the same thing."
> -- Leonard Peltier
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] a new web area for Apache OpenOffice third party products
Posted by Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com>.
On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 8:52 AM, janI <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> On 11 June 2013 16:01, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 8:19 PM, Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > > We used to have the old Distribution project that for the most part has
> > > been revised to a very minimal presence...
> > > http://www.openoffice.org/distribution/
> > >
> > > Recently, there seems to be a renewed interest in posting information
> > > about new and former Apache OpenOffice distribution outlets -- notably
> > > CD/DVD sets. And old page containing CD/DVD vendors still exists but
> is
> > > not linked in any place. Since /distribution/cdrom/sellers.html is
> > > redirected because of changes to this area, you can see and download
> the
> > > old page from svn:
> > >
> > >
> >
> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/openoffice/ooo-site/trunk/content/distribution/cdrom/sellers.html?view=log
> > >
> > > Are we interested in reviving this listing, or something similar to it?
> > > Pros...Cons, etc.
> > >
> >
> > Looking at queries on the mailing list, forums, etc., we don't get a
> > lot of people asking for CDs. Maybe 15 or 20 in the last year, yes?
> > Compare that to over 50 million downloads. So I don't think this is
> > critical, but no objections to having such a list.
> >
> > On the other hand, unless the page is very prominently linked, like
> > from our home page, I doubt the casual user will find it. And if
> > someone wants to buy a CD it is easy to just type "buy openoffice cd"
> > into a search engine and see places where you can buy a CD, including
> > Amazon, etc. In some sense Google and Bing are better at helping
> > users find information than we are, even when that information is on
> > our own website!
> >
>
> +1 to make a prominent third party site in different languages, linked
> directly from our top pages, that way google spider will catch the third
> party product hotter than otherwise.
>
>
> >
> > > A new listing would not have to be by region as this old one is. Given
> > > update issues in the past, if we provided a new listing page, we would
> > > likely need disclaimers regarding: accuracy, support, relation to
> Apache
> > > OpenOffice(this project), etc.
> > >
> > > As with all our web pages, we could accept additions though the CMS
> from
> > > non-commtters.
> > >
> >
> > Levels in which we might do things:
> >
> > Level 1 -- Do nothing but watch for abuses. If someone wants to sell
> > a CD, then they are free to do it, per the license. They can
> > advertise on eBay, their website, etc., but they have no permission to
> > use the trademarks. Nothing special on our website.
> >
>
>
> >
> > Level 2 -- We allow a listing on our website (or wiki) of those who
> > offer CDs. But we make no attempt to verify anything. It is all
> > "caveat emptor". We put in disclaimers on the page so users know that
> > we have not vetted anything.
> >
> > Level 3 -- We review requests for listing and approve them only if
> > they meet our qualifications, which might include proper use of
> > trademarks, a link back to our website, etc. This is similar to what
> > we did with consultants.
> >
> > Level 4 -- Like Level 3, but for those distributors who meet our
> > qualifications we offer a special logo they can use, something like a
> > "Community Distributor".
> >
> > Personally, I think Level 1 is fine. But Level 2 doesn't really help
> > our users. We'd be offering placement on our website to vendors
> > without really getting anything in return. So I think we want
> > something like Level 3 or Level 4, where we promote the public good by
> > reviewing and approving the listings that meeting reasonable criteria.
> >
> I think we should aim at 3), and while we are getting a new logo consider
> 4), which I think is the best.
>
> rgds
> jan I.
>
I know we don't get MANY requests for CDs but we seem to get enough from
frustrated users to warrant attention to this in my opinion. And, it would
encourage entities that might want to engage in this form of assistance.
Level 2 is certainly an easy implementation but I don't know how well this
would play out.
I think we should make Level 3 a goal, as we did with the consultants. I
would be happy to start on this path if we have enough agreement here.
Right now, I don't think we would have many entries, but having this would
help. It would probably not be feasible to review all contents but
certainly trademark issues.
I definitely like the idea of translations for the other language areas --
I would assume we would take entries from one area -- English -- but the
contents of the results page would be translated? Something to work on down
the road.
Level 4 is a great idea as well.
> >
> > Criteria might include (and this has been discussed in some older
> threads):
> >
> > 1) Proper acknowledgements of trademarks
> >
> > 2) Link back to www.openoffice.org
> >
> > 3) Distributes the most-recent version of AOO (within some time period
> > after a new release)
> >
> > 4) Makes it clear that any charge is for the media and convenience,
> > not for the underlying AOO software
> >
> > Stuff like that. This could be in the form of an agreement that the
> > distributor signs off on.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > -Rob
> >
> >
> > >
> > > --
> > >
> >
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > MzK
> > >
> > > "You can't believe one thing and do another.
> > > What you believe and what you do are the same thing."
> > > -- Leonard Peltier
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
> >
> >
>
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MzK
"You can't believe one thing and do another.
What you believe and what you do are the same thing."
-- Leonard Peltier
Re: [DISCUSS] a new web area for Apache OpenOffice third party products
Posted by janI <ja...@apache.org>.
On 11 June 2013 16:01, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 8:19 PM, Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > We used to have the old Distribution project that for the most part has
> > been revised to a very minimal presence...
> > http://www.openoffice.org/distribution/
> >
> > Recently, there seems to be a renewed interest in posting information
> > about new and former Apache OpenOffice distribution outlets -- notably
> > CD/DVD sets. And old page containing CD/DVD vendors still exists but is
> > not linked in any place. Since /distribution/cdrom/sellers.html is
> > redirected because of changes to this area, you can see and download the
> > old page from svn:
> >
> >
> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/openoffice/ooo-site/trunk/content/distribution/cdrom/sellers.html?view=log
> >
> > Are we interested in reviving this listing, or something similar to it?
> > Pros...Cons, etc.
> >
>
> Looking at queries on the mailing list, forums, etc., we don't get a
> lot of people asking for CDs. Maybe 15 or 20 in the last year, yes?
> Compare that to over 50 million downloads. So I don't think this is
> critical, but no objections to having such a list.
>
> On the other hand, unless the page is very prominently linked, like
> from our home page, I doubt the casual user will find it. And if
> someone wants to buy a CD it is easy to just type "buy openoffice cd"
> into a search engine and see places where you can buy a CD, including
> Amazon, etc. In some sense Google and Bing are better at helping
> users find information than we are, even when that information is on
> our own website!
>
+1 to make a prominent third party site in different languages, linked
directly from our top pages, that way google spider will catch the third
party product hotter than otherwise.
>
> > A new listing would not have to be by region as this old one is. Given
> > update issues in the past, if we provided a new listing page, we would
> > likely need disclaimers regarding: accuracy, support, relation to Apache
> > OpenOffice(this project), etc.
> >
> > As with all our web pages, we could accept additions though the CMS from
> > non-commtters.
> >
>
> Levels in which we might do things:
>
> Level 1 -- Do nothing but watch for abuses. If someone wants to sell
> a CD, then they are free to do it, per the license. They can
> advertise on eBay, their website, etc., but they have no permission to
> use the trademarks. Nothing special on our website.
>
>
> Level 2 -- We allow a listing on our website (or wiki) of those who
> offer CDs. But we make no attempt to verify anything. It is all
> "caveat emptor". We put in disclaimers on the page so users know that
> we have not vetted anything.
>
> Level 3 -- We review requests for listing and approve them only if
> they meet our qualifications, which might include proper use of
> trademarks, a link back to our website, etc. This is similar to what
> we did with consultants.
>
> Level 4 -- Like Level 3, but for those distributors who meet our
> qualifications we offer a special logo they can use, something like a
> "Community Distributor".
>
> Personally, I think Level 1 is fine. But Level 2 doesn't really help
> our users. We'd be offering placement on our website to vendors
> without really getting anything in return. So I think we want
> something like Level 3 or Level 4, where we promote the public good by
> reviewing and approving the listings that meeting reasonable criteria.
>
I think we should aim at 3), and while we are getting a new logo consider
4), which I think is the best.
rgds
jan I.
>
> Criteria might include (and this has been discussed in some older threads):
>
> 1) Proper acknowledgements of trademarks
>
> 2) Link back to www.openoffice.org
>
> 3) Distributes the most-recent version of AOO (within some time period
> after a new release)
>
> 4) Makes it clear that any charge is for the media and convenience,
> not for the underlying AOO software
>
> Stuff like that. This could be in the form of an agreement that the
> distributor signs off on.
>
> Regards,
>
> -Rob
>
>
> >
> > --
> >
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > MzK
> >
> > "You can't believe one thing and do another.
> > What you believe and what you do are the same thing."
> > -- Leonard Peltier
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
>
Re: [DISCUSS] a new web area for Apache OpenOffice third party products
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 8:19 PM, Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
> We used to have the old Distribution project that for the most part has
> been revised to a very minimal presence...
> http://www.openoffice.org/distribution/
>
> Recently, there seems to be a renewed interest in posting information
> about new and former Apache OpenOffice distribution outlets -- notably
> CD/DVD sets. And old page containing CD/DVD vendors still exists but is
> not linked in any place. Since /distribution/cdrom/sellers.html is
> redirected because of changes to this area, you can see and download the
> old page from svn:
>
> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/openoffice/ooo-site/trunk/content/distribution/cdrom/sellers.html?view=log
>
> Are we interested in reviving this listing, or something similar to it?
> Pros...Cons, etc.
>
Looking at queries on the mailing list, forums, etc., we don't get a
lot of people asking for CDs. Maybe 15 or 20 in the last year, yes?
Compare that to over 50 million downloads. So I don't think this is
critical, but no objections to having such a list.
On the other hand, unless the page is very prominently linked, like
from our home page, I doubt the casual user will find it. And if
someone wants to buy a CD it is easy to just type "buy openoffice cd"
into a search engine and see places where you can buy a CD, including
Amazon, etc. In some sense Google and Bing are better at helping
users find information than we are, even when that information is on
our own website!
> A new listing would not have to be by region as this old one is. Given
> update issues in the past, if we provided a new listing page, we would
> likely need disclaimers regarding: accuracy, support, relation to Apache
> OpenOffice(this project), etc.
>
> As with all our web pages, we could accept additions though the CMS from
> non-commtters.
>
Levels in which we might do things:
Level 1 -- Do nothing but watch for abuses. If someone wants to sell
a CD, then they are free to do it, per the license. They can
advertise on eBay, their website, etc., but they have no permission to
use the trademarks. Nothing special on our website.
Level 2 -- We allow a listing on our website (or wiki) of those who
offer CDs. But we make no attempt to verify anything. It is all
"caveat emptor". We put in disclaimers on the page so users know that
we have not vetted anything.
Level 3 -- We review requests for listing and approve them only if
they meet our qualifications, which might include proper use of
trademarks, a link back to our website, etc. This is similar to what
we did with consultants.
Level 4 -- Like Level 3, but for those distributors who meet our
qualifications we offer a special logo they can use, something like a
"Community Distributor".
Personally, I think Level 1 is fine. But Level 2 doesn't really help
our users. We'd be offering placement on our website to vendors
without really getting anything in return. So I think we want
something like Level 3 or Level 4, where we promote the public good by
reviewing and approving the listings that meeting reasonable criteria.
Criteria might include (and this has been discussed in some older threads):
1) Proper acknowledgements of trademarks
2) Link back to www.openoffice.org
3) Distributes the most-recent version of AOO (within some time period
after a new release)
4) Makes it clear that any charge is for the media and convenience,
not for the underlying AOO software
Stuff like that. This could be in the form of an agreement that the
distributor signs off on.
Regards,
-Rob
>
> --
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> MzK
>
> "You can't believe one thing and do another.
> What you believe and what you do are the same thing."
> -- Leonard Peltier
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org