You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@openoffice.apache.org by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> on 2012/01/03 20:15:26 UTC
Moving ahead with the AOO logo and rebranding
A month ago Drew sent a logo proposal to the ooo-marketing list. It
has been discussed and iterated on that list. The current state of
the proposal is on the wiki:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOOLogo+proposal
Personally I think this is fine work, and since we've received no
counter-proposals in the last month, we should go ahead and update the
splash screen and website with the new logo. That's my opinion.
However, others have suggested we take a RTC approach to this. So be
it.
Please review the logo proposal on the above wiki page. If you have a
counter proposal now, or if you intend to make a counter-proposal but
need more time, then please speak up. But if there are no other
proposals, then we have lazy consensus.
Considering that some project members may still be on vacation, I'd
like to leave this open for another full week.
-Rob
Re: Moving ahead with the AOO logo and rebranding
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 4:05 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton
<de...@acm.org> wrote:
> +1
>
> To be clear, I assume the discussion is about the single logo that is at the top of the page ("Example" column) and made available in two download formats (Logo-AOO-dj.tar.bz2 and Logo-AOO-dj.zip).
>
> I also assume that it is the essential design that is being approved. There is need for some tweaking of the derived bitmaps, especially at the smallest size.
>
That is my understanding as well. Is the basic design satisfactory?
If so, then we can invest in the effort to spin it in different sizes
and shapes, for product and website use, supporter use ("Get Apache
OpenOffice"), downstream consumer use ("Powered by Apache
OpenOffice"), etc.
> - Dennis
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rob Weir [mailto:robweir@apache.org]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 03, 2012 11:15
> To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Moving ahead with the AOO logo and rebranding
>
> A month ago Drew sent a logo proposal to the ooo-marketing list. It
> has been discussed and iterated on that list. The current state of
> the proposal is on the wiki:
>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOOLogo+proposal
>
> Personally I think this is fine work, and since we've received no
> counter-proposals in the last month, we should go ahead and update the
> splash screen and website with the new logo. That's my opinion.
> However, others have suggested we take a RTC approach to this. So be
> it.
>
> Please review the logo proposal on the above wiki page. If you have a
> counter proposal now, or if you intend to make a counter-proposal but
> need more time, then please speak up. But if there are no other
> proposals, then we have lazy consensus.
>
> Considering that some project members may still be on vacation, I'd
> like to leave this open for another full week.
>
> -Rob
>
RE: Moving ahead with the AOO logo and rebranding
Posted by "Dennis E. Hamilton" <de...@acm.org>.
+1
To be clear, I assume the discussion is about the single logo that is at the top of the page ("Example" column) and made available in two download formats (Logo-AOO-dj.tar.bz2 and Logo-AOO-dj.zip).
I also assume that it is the essential design that is being approved. There is need for some tweaking of the derived bitmaps, especially at the smallest size.
- Dennis
-----Original Message-----
From: Rob Weir [mailto:robweir@apache.org]
Sent: Tuesday, January 03, 2012 11:15
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Moving ahead with the AOO logo and rebranding
A month ago Drew sent a logo proposal to the ooo-marketing list. It
has been discussed and iterated on that list. The current state of
the proposal is on the wiki:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOOLogo+proposal
Personally I think this is fine work, and since we've received no
counter-proposals in the last month, we should go ahead and update the
splash screen and website with the new logo. That's my opinion.
However, others have suggested we take a RTC approach to this. So be
it.
Please review the logo proposal on the above wiki page. If you have a
counter proposal now, or if you intend to make a counter-proposal but
need more time, then please speak up. But if there are no other
proposals, then we have lazy consensus.
Considering that some project members may still be on vacation, I'd
like to leave this open for another full week.
-Rob
Re: Moving ahead with the AOO logo and rebranding
Posted by Andrew Rist <an...@oracle.com>.
On 1/3/2012 1:36 PM, Pavel Janík wrote:
>> we would use (TM). At some point, say after we actually have a
>> release, then we could ask Apache to pursue registration for "Apache
>> OpenOffice"
> Why would we do so if we know that Sun/Oracle could not get it registered (and thus have chosen OpenOffice.org instead)?
Oracle used Oracle Open Office (as our proprietary version of OOo)
A.
Re: Moving ahead with the AOO logo and rebranding
Posted by Graham Lauder <g....@gmail.com>.
On Monday 09 Jan 2012 03:09:47 drew wrote:
> On Mon, 2012-01-09 at 03:55 +1300, Graham Lauder wrote:
> > On Wednesday 04 Jan 2012 11:14:53 Rob Weir wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 4:52 PM, Pedro Giffuni <pf...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > Hi Rob;
> > > >
> > > > JIC someone with a lot of spare time gives a try
> > > > on this logo thing ... I have some questions.
> > > >
> > > > What would be the implications (if any) of using
> > > > a legally licensed commercial font?
> > >
> > > Our ability to use such a logo would depend on the specific terms of
> > > the font license.
> > >
> > > But in general, a commercial font license might lead to restrictions
> > > on how we redistribute images using the font. For example, we might
> > > only be able to redistribute rasterized bitmaps of a logo, but not a
> > > scalable vector image that included a font glyph definition as well.
> > > A commercial font might also restrict who in the project is able to
> > > modify the logo or create derivative logos for the benefit of the
> > > project.
> > >
> > > I'm not sure any of these are killer objections to the use of a
> > > commercial font. But I think we'd want a strong design reason for not
> > > using a font with few or no restrictions.
> >
> > +1, the old font was a commercial one: Frutiger, which caused all sorts
> > of issues when being used by the community Artists. There are plenty of
> > similar fonts about. The "best" solution was Liberation Sans at 60%
> > IIRC. But that was just to try and maintain the old logo look as close
> > as possible.
> >
> > My personal opinion is; if we can't bundle the font with the software
> > then we shouldn't use it. Of course, it should be added there is
> > absolutely no reason why a font should be used at all in the main logo.
> > Taglines and positioners perhaps and a free font should be used in
> > things such as splashscreens, but the logo can be a graphic that looks
> > like text. I've added a couple of proposals based on a graphic that was
> > created in a vector editor, no fonts used, created as needed.
>
> On that last point I agree - and I suppose I started all this my
> mentioning which font I used - the final is not font based, it is
> paths...
>
Indeed, they're never right, I always find myself screwing with them no matter
how ideal they appeared to be at the start. :)
Cheers
GL
Re: Moving ahead with the AOO logo and rebranding
Posted by Graham Lauder <g....@gmail.com>.
On Tuesday 10 Jan 2012 07:17:52 Andrew Rist wrote:
> On 1/8/2012 5:59 PM, Graham Lauder wrote:
> > <snip>
> > What did you have in mind for the survey itself? Were you thinking of
> > SurveyMonkey?
> > Survey monkey is good, though personally I prefer Zoomerang, but I'm with
> > Claudio, Lime Survey is great and we have an instance in place already
> > that we possibly could use before Oracle pulls the plug entirely.
> >
> > Possible Andrew?
>
> All this infra is getting decommissioned as stuff moves to ASF. What's
> the link to the Lime Survey? Is that actually online?
> Even if it's still around, we should look for a more forward looking
> solution that we can reuse on future projects.
> (thus probably not a good idea to use, even if it's still around)
> Andrew
Fair enough, link is http://surveys.services.openoffice.org/ but I'm getting
timed out, so it's possibly decommed already.
Cheers
G
>
> > I was considering a JIRA request to infra to install an instance on an
> > AFS Server and that would be a definite for later. Right now I'm
> > looking for a path of least resistance to some useful data.
Re: Bugzilla Help [Was Re: Moving ahead with the AOO logo and rebranding]
Posted by Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net>.
On Jan 9, 2012, at 7:59 PM, TJ Frazier wrote:
> On 1/9/2012 19:40, Dave Fisher wrote:
>> Here we are in a new thread. Let's discuss the state of Bugzilla:
>>
>>
>> On Jan 9, 2012, at 5:32 PM, Graham Lauder wrote:
>>
>>> On Tuesday 10 Jan 2012 13:14:27 Dave Fisher wrote:
>>>> On Jan 9, 2012, at 3:56 PM, Christian Lohmaier wrote:
>>>>> Hi *,
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 8:20 PM, Dave Fisher<da...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>>>>> Who are our projects BZ admins? Are there remaining issues.
>>>>>
>>>>> No idea if there are any, at least the contact given on the bugzilla
>>>>> page itself to report problems is a black hole, no response nor fixin
>>>>> ghte reported problem (xmlrpc).
>>>>> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-ooo-dev/201111.mbox/%3
>>>>> CCAOPHaVRC6ZqZMX_XVNeivYFQR6sq_ucdtqjWcE3xPtF-zVd5%2Bw%40mail.gmail.com%3
>>>>> E It has been suggested that infra issues via jira are necessary to get
>>>>> in touch with the AOOo-bugzilla admins, but issues.apache.org/ooo/ still
>>>>> reads:
>>>>> "This is Apache OOo Bugzilla: the Apache OOo podling bug system. In
>>>>> case of problems with the functioning of Apache OOo Bugzilla, please
>>>>> contact bugzilla-admin@apache.org. Please Note: this e-mail address is
>>>>> only for reporting problems with Apache OOo Bugzilla. Mail about any
>>>>> other subject will be silently ignored."
>>
>> There are inconsistent instructions. We need to change this bugzilla-admin@apache.org address.
>>
>> IMO bugzilla trouble should be directed here.
>>
>> Bugzilla admins?
>>
>> Regards,
>> Dave
>>
> Hi, Dave,
>
> While we're at it, David McKay (dmckay@btconnect.com) has twice mentioned that he is willing to help with BZ, and BZ administration is part of his day job. Has anyone taken him up on this?
We've tried.I'm not sure if the connection was ever fully made. Let's see if he responds. If not would you try to contact him off-line and see if he is still available?
Regards,
Dave
>
> --
> /tj/
>
Re: Bugzilla Help [Was Re: Moving ahead with the AOO logo and rebranding]
Posted by TJ Frazier <tj...@cfl.rr.com>.
On 1/9/2012 19:40, Dave Fisher wrote:
> Here we are in a new thread. Let's discuss the state of Bugzilla:
>
>
> On Jan 9, 2012, at 5:32 PM, Graham Lauder wrote:
>
>> On Tuesday 10 Jan 2012 13:14:27 Dave Fisher wrote:
>>> On Jan 9, 2012, at 3:56 PM, Christian Lohmaier wrote:
>>>> Hi *,
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 8:20 PM, Dave Fisher<da...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>>>> Who are our projects BZ admins? Are there remaining issues.
>>>>
>>>> No idea if there are any, at least the contact given on the bugzilla
>>>> page itself to report problems is a black hole, no response nor fixin
>>>> ghte reported problem (xmlrpc).
>>>> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-ooo-dev/201111.mbox/%3
>>>> CCAOPHaVRC6ZqZMX_XVNeivYFQR6sq_ucdtqjWcE3xPtF-zVd5%2Bw%40mail.gmail.com%3
>>>> E It has been suggested that infra issues via jira are necessary to get
>>>> in touch with the AOOo-bugzilla admins, but issues.apache.org/ooo/ still
>>>> reads:
>>>> "This is Apache OOo Bugzilla: the Apache OOo podling bug system. In
>>>> case of problems with the functioning of Apache OOo Bugzilla, please
>>>> contact bugzilla-admin@apache.org. Please Note: this e-mail address is
>>>> only for reporting problems with Apache OOo Bugzilla. Mail about any
>>>> other subject will be silently ignored."
>
> There are inconsistent instructions. We need to change this bugzilla-admin@apache.org address.
>
> IMO bugzilla trouble should be directed here.
>
> Bugzilla admins?
>
> Regards,
> Dave
>
Hi, Dave,
While we're at it, David McKay (dmckay@btconnect.com) has twice
mentioned that he is willing to help with BZ, and BZ administration is
part of his day job. Has anyone taken him up on this?
--
/tj/
Bugzilla Help [Was Re: Moving ahead with the AOO logo and rebranding]
Posted by Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net>.
Here we are in a new thread. Let's discuss the state of Bugzilla:
On Jan 9, 2012, at 5:32 PM, Graham Lauder wrote:
> On Tuesday 10 Jan 2012 13:14:27 Dave Fisher wrote:
>> On Jan 9, 2012, at 3:56 PM, Christian Lohmaier wrote:
>>> Hi *,
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 8:20 PM, Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>>> Who are our projects BZ admins? Are there remaining issues.
>>>
>>> No idea if there are any, at least the contact given on the bugzilla
>>> page itself to report problems is a black hole, no response nor fixin
>>> ghte reported problem (xmlrpc).
>>> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-ooo-dev/201111.mbox/%3
>>> CCAOPHaVRC6ZqZMX_XVNeivYFQR6sq_ucdtqjWcE3xPtF-zVd5%2Bw%40mail.gmail.com%3
>>> E It has been suggested that infra issues via jira are necessary to get
>>> in touch with the AOOo-bugzilla admins, but issues.apache.org/ooo/ still
>>> reads:
>>> "This is Apache OOo Bugzilla: the Apache OOo podling bug system. In
>>> case of problems with the functioning of Apache OOo Bugzilla, please
>>> contact bugzilla-admin@apache.org. Please Note: this e-mail address is
>>> only for reporting problems with Apache OOo Bugzilla. Mail about any
>>> other subject will be silently ignored."
There are inconsistent instructions. We need to change this bugzilla-admin@apache.org address.
IMO bugzilla trouble should be directed here.
Bugzilla admins?
Regards,
Dave
Re: Moving ahead with the AOO logo and rebranding
Posted by Graham Lauder <g....@gmail.com>.
On Tuesday 10 Jan 2012 13:14:27 Dave Fisher wrote:
> On Jan 9, 2012, at 3:56 PM, Christian Lohmaier wrote:
> > Hi *,
> >
> > On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 8:20 PM, Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net> wrote:
> >> Who are our projects BZ admins? Are there remaining issues.
> >
> > No idea if there are any, at least the contact given on the bugzilla
> > page itself to report problems is a black hole, no response nor fixin
> > ghte reported problem (xmlrpc).
> > http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-ooo-dev/201111.mbox/%3
> > CCAOPHaVRC6ZqZMX_XVNeivYFQR6sq_ucdtqjWcE3xPtF-zVd5%2Bw%40mail.gmail.com%3
> > E It has been suggested that infra issues via jira are necessary to get
> > in touch with the AOOo-bugzilla admins, but issues.apache.org/ooo/ still
> > reads:
> > "This is Apache OOo Bugzilla: the Apache OOo podling bug system. In
> > case of problems with the functioning of Apache OOo Bugzilla, please
> > contact bugzilla-admin@apache.org. Please Note: this e-mail address is
> > only for reporting problems with Apache OOo Bugzilla. Mail about any
> > other subject will be silently ignored."
> >
> > But that's a detail, and I already took the non-response as an
> > implicit WONTFIX - but as you brought up the topic...
>
> Any problems that are not getting resolved for the community need to be
> brought to here.
>
> Please remember that we are volunteers here. This project insisted on
> having its own, separate Bugzilla instance. ASF Infrastructure set this
> up, we are responsible for seeing that we have sustainable support.
>
> There is a reason why it is said "if it didn't happen on the list it didn't
> happen."
>
> Thanks for bringing this up. Let's see if someone takes the lead here.
>
> Regards,
> Dave
>
> > ciao
> > Christian
This belongs in another thread please.
If we are bound to using a single list for all decisions then some discipline
would be appreciated.
Re: Moving ahead with the AOO logo and rebranding
Posted by Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net>.
On Jan 9, 2012, at 3:56 PM, Christian Lohmaier wrote:
> Hi *,
>
> On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 8:20 PM, Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>> Who are our projects BZ admins? Are there remaining issues.
>
> No idea if there are any, at least the contact given on the bugzilla
> page itself to report problems is a black hole, no response nor fixin
> ghte reported problem (xmlrpc).
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-ooo-dev/201111.mbox/%3CCAOPHaVRC6ZqZMX_XVNeivYFQR6sq_ucdtqjWcE3xPtF-zVd5%2Bw%40mail.gmail.com%3E
> It has been suggested that infra issues via jira are necessary to get
> in touch with the AOOo-bugzilla admins, but issues.apache.org/ooo/
> still reads:
> "This is Apache OOo Bugzilla: the Apache OOo podling bug system. In
> case of problems with the functioning of Apache OOo Bugzilla, please
> contact bugzilla-admin@apache.org. Please Note: this e-mail address is
> only for reporting problems with Apache OOo Bugzilla. Mail about any
> other subject will be silently ignored."
>
> But that's a detail, and I already took the non-response as an
> implicit WONTFIX - but as you brought up the topic...
Any problems that are not getting resolved for the community need to be brought to here.
Please remember that we are volunteers here. This project insisted on having its own, separate Bugzilla instance. ASF Infrastructure set this up, we are responsible for seeing that we have sustainable support.
There is a reason why it is said "if it didn't happen on the list it didn't happen."
Thanks for bringing this up. Let's see if someone takes the lead here.
Regards,
Dave
>
> ciao
> Christian
RE: Moving ahead with the AOO logo and rebranding
Posted by "Dennis E. Hamilton" <de...@acm.org>.
+1 I think ooo-users@ is a much better choice.
Also, it means there can be a little work eliciting the necessary information before a bug report is created, when appropriate.
- Dennis
-----Original Message-----
From: Rob Weir [mailto:robweir@apache.org]
Sent: Monday, January 09, 2012 18:20
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: Moving ahead with the AOO logo and rebranding
On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 8:09 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton
<de...@acm.org> wrote:
> Apparently, the bugzilla-admin@apache.org e-mail is an alias for an infrastructure list, perhaps infrastructure@ itself. Issues that are specific to the AOO Podling bugzilla don't reach a project designee, if there is one, in any direct way.
>
Yes, the bugzilla-admin@apache.org emails go to
infrastructure@apache.org. A large percentage of recent posts are
from OpenOffice users, for example, users just trying to report an
issue or asking support questions.
It might make sense, for our BZ instance at least, since our users are
less technical, to encourage them to raise issues on our primary
support list --- ooo-users -- and to deemphasize the any reference to
bugzilla-admin@apache.org. That will increase the signal/noise ratio
for Infra, while ensuring our uses get directed to where they are most
likely to get the kind of assistance they want.
-Rob
> - Dennis
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: lohmaier@googlemail.com [mailto:lohmaier@googlemail.com] On Behalf Of Christian Lohmaier
> Sent: Monday, January 09, 2012 15:56
> To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Moving ahead with the AOO logo and rebranding
>
> Hi *,
>
> On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 8:20 PM, Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>> Who are our projects BZ admins? Are there remaining issues.
>
> No idea if there are any, at least the contact given on the bugzilla
> page itself to report problems is a black hole, no response nor fixin
> ghte reported problem (xmlrpc).
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-ooo-dev/201111.mbox/%3CCAOPHaVRC6ZqZMX_XVNeivYFQR6sq_ucdtqjWcE3xPtF-zVd5%2Bw%40mail.gmail.com%3E
> It has been suggested that infra issues via jira are necessary to get
> in touch with the AOOo-bugzilla admins, but issues.apache.org/ooo/
> still reads:
> "This is Apache OOo Bugzilla: the Apache OOo podling bug system. In
> case of problems with the functioning of Apache OOo Bugzilla, please
> contact bugzilla-admin@apache.org. Please Note: this e-mail address is
> only for reporting problems with Apache OOo Bugzilla. Mail about any
> other subject will be silently ignored."
>
> But that's a detail, and I already took the non-response as an
> implicit WONTFIX - but as you brought up the topic...
>
> ciao
> Christian
>
Re: Moving ahead with the AOO logo and rebranding
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 8:09 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton
<de...@acm.org> wrote:
> Apparently, the bugzilla-admin@apache.org e-mail is an alias for an infrastructure list, perhaps infrastructure@ itself. Issues that are specific to the AOO Podling bugzilla don't reach a project designee, if there is one, in any direct way.
>
Yes, the bugzilla-admin@apache.org emails go to
infrastructure@apache.org. A large percentage of recent posts are
from OpenOffice users, for example, users just trying to report an
issue or asking support questions.
It might make sense, for our BZ instance at least, since our users are
less technical, to encourage them to raise issues on our primary
support list --- ooo-users -- and to deemphasize the any reference to
bugzilla-admin@apache.org. That will increase the signal/noise ratio
for Infra, while ensuring our uses get directed to where they are most
likely to get the kind of assistance they want.
-Rob
> - Dennis
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: lohmaier@googlemail.com [mailto:lohmaier@googlemail.com] On Behalf Of Christian Lohmaier
> Sent: Monday, January 09, 2012 15:56
> To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Moving ahead with the AOO logo and rebranding
>
> Hi *,
>
> On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 8:20 PM, Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>> Who are our projects BZ admins? Are there remaining issues.
>
> No idea if there are any, at least the contact given on the bugzilla
> page itself to report problems is a black hole, no response nor fixin
> ghte reported problem (xmlrpc).
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-ooo-dev/201111.mbox/%3CCAOPHaVRC6ZqZMX_XVNeivYFQR6sq_ucdtqjWcE3xPtF-zVd5%2Bw%40mail.gmail.com%3E
> It has been suggested that infra issues via jira are necessary to get
> in touch with the AOOo-bugzilla admins, but issues.apache.org/ooo/
> still reads:
> "This is Apache OOo Bugzilla: the Apache OOo podling bug system. In
> case of problems with the functioning of Apache OOo Bugzilla, please
> contact bugzilla-admin@apache.org. Please Note: this e-mail address is
> only for reporting problems with Apache OOo Bugzilla. Mail about any
> other subject will be silently ignored."
>
> But that's a detail, and I already took the non-response as an
> implicit WONTFIX - but as you brought up the topic...
>
> ciao
> Christian
>
RE: Moving ahead with the AOO logo and rebranding
Posted by "Dennis E. Hamilton" <de...@acm.org>.
Apparently, the bugzilla-admin@apache.org e-mail is an alias for an infrastructure list, perhaps infrastructure@ itself. Issues that are specific to the AOO Podling bugzilla don't reach a project designee, if there is one, in any direct way.
- Dennis
-----Original Message-----
From: lohmaier@googlemail.com [mailto:lohmaier@googlemail.com] On Behalf Of Christian Lohmaier
Sent: Monday, January 09, 2012 15:56
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: Moving ahead with the AOO logo and rebranding
Hi *,
On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 8:20 PM, Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> Who are our projects BZ admins? Are there remaining issues.
No idea if there are any, at least the contact given on the bugzilla
page itself to report problems is a black hole, no response nor fixin
ghte reported problem (xmlrpc).
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-ooo-dev/201111.mbox/%3CCAOPHaVRC6ZqZMX_XVNeivYFQR6sq_ucdtqjWcE3xPtF-zVd5%2Bw%40mail.gmail.com%3E
It has been suggested that infra issues via jira are necessary to get
in touch with the AOOo-bugzilla admins, but issues.apache.org/ooo/
still reads:
"This is Apache OOo Bugzilla: the Apache OOo podling bug system. In
case of problems with the functioning of Apache OOo Bugzilla, please
contact bugzilla-admin@apache.org. Please Note: this e-mail address is
only for reporting problems with Apache OOo Bugzilla. Mail about any
other subject will be silently ignored."
But that's a detail, and I already took the non-response as an
implicit WONTFIX - but as you brought up the topic...
ciao
Christian
Re: Moving ahead with the AOO logo and rebranding
Posted by Christian Lohmaier <cl...@openoffice.org>.
Hi *,
On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 8:20 PM, Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> Who are our projects BZ admins? Are there remaining issues.
No idea if there are any, at least the contact given on the bugzilla
page itself to report problems is a black hole, no response nor fixin
ghte reported problem (xmlrpc).
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-ooo-dev/201111.mbox/%3CCAOPHaVRC6ZqZMX_XVNeivYFQR6sq_ucdtqjWcE3xPtF-zVd5%2Bw%40mail.gmail.com%3E
It has been suggested that infra issues via jira are necessary to get
in touch with the AOOo-bugzilla admins, but issues.apache.org/ooo/
still reads:
"This is Apache OOo Bugzilla: the Apache OOo podling bug system. In
case of problems with the functioning of Apache OOo Bugzilla, please
contact bugzilla-admin@apache.org. Please Note: this e-mail address is
only for reporting problems with Apache OOo Bugzilla. Mail about any
other subject will be silently ignored."
But that's a detail, and I already took the non-response as an
implicit WONTFIX - but as you brought up the topic...
ciao
Christian
Re: Moving ahead with the AOO logo and rebranding
Posted by Graham Lauder <g....@gmail.com>.
On Tuesday 10 Jan 2012 09:54:44 Pedro Giffuni wrote:
> --- Lun 9/1/12, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> ha scritto:
> ...
>
> > I made a reasonable observation on the advantage of having
> > our own instance of Lime. This solves the data
> > security/privacy problem.
>
> FWIW, personal issues apart, I don't think there is
> sufficient justification for having our own Limesurvey
> instance. Lets just use the public one for these things
> that have no privacy issues.
Unfortunately to get any meaningful data it would cost, it's only free up to
25 responses, there are a lot of these about that run on different software
and most of them you get a fixed number of free responses. We need to able to
cope with responses in the thousands. Any thing less than that could cause
issues. Limeservice requires payment for responses, without knowing how many
responses, you have no way of knowing how much the survey is going to cost.
If running on third party infrastructure is the go, then we would be best to
set it up on another host. Obviously hosting and domain would have a cost
component.
Zoomerang is probably the lowest cost in terms of manhours and cash outlay
Cheers
GL
Re: Moving ahead with the AOO logo and rebranding
Posted by Pedro Giffuni <pf...@apache.org>.
--- Lun 9/1/12, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> ha scritto:
...
>
> I made a reasonable observation on the advantage of having
> our own instance of Lime. This solves the data
> security/privacy problem.
FWIW, personal issues apart, I don't think there is
sufficient justification for having our own Limesurvey
instance. Lets just use the public one for these things
that have no privacy issues.
> It could also provide a good substitute for the user
> registration system that we lost when migrating to
> Apache.
Actually I am glad that registration system is gone.
Pedro.
Re: Moving ahead with the AOO logo and rebranding
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 2:20 PM, Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> On Jan 9, 2012, at 10:43 AM, Rob Weir wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 1:38 PM, Joe Schaefer <jo...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> Look Rob, it is clear you lack any notion of the years of
>>> history infra has had supporting new initiatives for projects
>>> that were brought here, and have no grasp of how rude your
>>> remarks are to the people who try to service this particular
>>> project's needs and interests.
>>>
>>
>> I've been through this several times. I know that everything new we
>> ask for is considered impossible at first, or we're told to just go
>> away, or that the request is an insult to the dignity of Infra. But I
>> also know that with time and patience and careful explanation, it all
>> becomes possible in the end, and is done quite well. I understand how
>> it works. I've already been sent the "users manual" for Infra.
>
> The bumps have attracted more attention than what has gone smoothly.
>
> We need more than TJ and Drew to manage the MediaWiki and Forums.
>
> Who are our projects BZ admins? Are there remaining issues.
>
> Joe has done significant work on the Apache CMS making it resilient to the very large sledgehammer that is the OOo website.
>
> Pootle server required no handwringing, other Apache projects had a need. Does anyone know if we have the old data from Martin, et al?
>
> Buildbots are being worked on...
>
> E&T are in process. Who is working on the short term MOU w/ SF?
>
> Apache Infrastructure is doing a huge amount of work for AOO.
>
> Please be thankful and not so willing to engage in every fight and always having the last word.
>
And AOO volunteers are doing a huge amount for the project as well.
We're all doing this for a common purpose, so I'd appreciate it if we
stopped excusing Infra like it was a different class of volunteer (or
paid Apache staff as the case may be) that is free to insult another
class of volunteer (or paid employee as the case may be). Let's not
perpetuate the perception that those who work hard (paid or volunteer)
get a "free pass" on civility.
I made a reasonable observation on the advantage of having our own
instance of Lime. This solves the data security/privacy problem. It
could also provide a good substitute for the user registration system
that we lost when migrating to Apache. You, Joe, or anyone else, may
agree or disagree with these points and are free to argue your points.
But the personal insults do not belong here.
-Rob
> Regards,
> Dave
>
>>
>>> Go ask Geronimo people about their attitudes towards our wiki
>>> deployments over the years to get some feel for the game you
>>> are trying to play. We're long past those days now.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>> From: Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>
>>>> To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>>> Cc:
>>>> Sent: Monday, January 9, 2012 1:34 PM
>>>> Subject: Re: Moving ahead with the AOO logo and rebranding
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 1:31 PM, Joe Schaefer <jo...@yahoo.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> -1. There is no shame in using 3rd party services for unofficial
>>>>> business such as surveys and polls. Please get out of the nasty
>>>>> habit of thinking that what's good for this project is good for
>>>>> the org, it doesn't help matters at all and will only serve to
>>>>> alienate infra people from addressing your specific needs.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Joe, there should be shame in your comments above. Please take your
>>>> "nasty habit" comments elsewhere.
>>>>
>>>> I think this project has enhanced Apache and Infra's view of what is
>>>> possible at Apache, and that this is to the benefit of all Apache
>>>> projects.
>>>>
>>>> -Rob
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>>>> From: Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>
>>>>>> To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>>>>> Cc:
>>>>>> Sent: Monday, January 9, 2012 1:28 PM
>>>>>> Subject: Re: Moving ahead with the AOO logo and rebranding
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 1:24 PM, Pedro Giffuni <pf...@apache.org>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>> --- Lun 9/1/12, Andrew Rist <an...@oracle.com> ha
>>>> scritto:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 1/8/2012 5:59 PM, Graham Lauder wrote:
>>>>>>>> > <snip>
>>>>>>>> > What did you have in mind for the survey itself?
>>>>>>>> Were you thinking of
>>>>>>>> > SurveyMonkey?
>>>>>>>> > Survey monkey is good, though personally I prefer
>>>>>>>> Zoomerang, but I'm with
>>>>>>>> > Claudio, Lime Survey is great and we have
>>>>>>>> an instance in place already that
>>>>>>>> > we possibly could use before Oracle pulls the plug
>>>>>>>> entirely.
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> > Possible Andrew?
>>>>>>>> All this infra is getting decommissioned as stuff moves to
>>>>>>>> ASF. What's the link to the Lime Survey? Is that
>>>> actually
>>>>>>>> online?
>>>>>>>> Even if it's still around, we should look for a more
>>>>>>>> forward looking solution that we can reuse on future projects.
>>>>>>>> (thus probably not a good idea to use, even if it's still
>>>>>>>> around)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> AFAIR,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Lime Survey has a free online service. I am not sure of the
>>>>>>> conditions (ad supported, fewer questions maybe) but it
>>>>>>> should be enough for most purposes.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And if we want to host this at Apache, I bet other projects would use
>>>>>> it as well, probably also the Foundation.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Pre-reqs are not particularly complicated:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>> http://docs.limesurvey.org/Installation&structure=English+Instructions+for+LimeSurvey#Make_sure_you_can_use_LimeSurvey_on_your_website
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Pedro.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>
Re: Moving ahead with the AOO logo and rebranding
Posted by Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net>.
On Jan 9, 2012, at 10:43 AM, Rob Weir wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 1:38 PM, Joe Schaefer <jo...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> Look Rob, it is clear you lack any notion of the years of
>> history infra has had supporting new initiatives for projects
>> that were brought here, and have no grasp of how rude your
>> remarks are to the people who try to service this particular
>> project's needs and interests.
>>
>
> I've been through this several times. I know that everything new we
> ask for is considered impossible at first, or we're told to just go
> away, or that the request is an insult to the dignity of Infra. But I
> also know that with time and patience and careful explanation, it all
> becomes possible in the end, and is done quite well. I understand how
> it works. I've already been sent the "users manual" for Infra.
The bumps have attracted more attention than what has gone smoothly.
We need more than TJ and Drew to manage the MediaWiki and Forums.
Who are our projects BZ admins? Are there remaining issues.
Joe has done significant work on the Apache CMS making it resilient to the very large sledgehammer that is the OOo website.
Pootle server required no handwringing, other Apache projects had a need. Does anyone know if we have the old data from Martin, et al?
Buildbots are being worked on...
E&T are in process. Who is working on the short term MOU w/ SF?
Apache Infrastructure is doing a huge amount of work for AOO.
Please be thankful and not so willing to engage in every fight and always having the last word.
Regards,
Dave
>
>> Go ask Geronimo people about their attitudes towards our wiki
>> deployments over the years to get some feel for the game you
>> are trying to play. We're long past those days now.
>>
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>
>>> To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>> Cc:
>>> Sent: Monday, January 9, 2012 1:34 PM
>>> Subject: Re: Moving ahead with the AOO logo and rebranding
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 1:31 PM, Joe Schaefer <jo...@yahoo.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>> -1. There is no shame in using 3rd party services for unofficial
>>>> business such as surveys and polls. Please get out of the nasty
>>>> habit of thinking that what's good for this project is good for
>>>> the org, it doesn't help matters at all and will only serve to
>>>> alienate infra people from addressing your specific needs.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Joe, there should be shame in your comments above. Please take your
>>> "nasty habit" comments elsewhere.
>>>
>>> I think this project has enhanced Apache and Infra's view of what is
>>> possible at Apache, and that this is to the benefit of all Apache
>>> projects.
>>>
>>> -Rob
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>>> From: Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>
>>>>> To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>>>> Cc:
>>>>> Sent: Monday, January 9, 2012 1:28 PM
>>>>> Subject: Re: Moving ahead with the AOO logo and rebranding
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 1:24 PM, Pedro Giffuni <pf...@apache.org>
>>> wrote:
>>>>>> ...
>>>>>> --- Lun 9/1/12, Andrew Rist <an...@oracle.com> ha
>>> scritto:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 1/8/2012 5:59 PM, Graham Lauder wrote:
>>>>>>> > <snip>
>>>>>>> > What did you have in mind for the survey itself?
>>>>>>> Were you thinking of
>>>>>>> > SurveyMonkey?
>>>>>>> > Survey monkey is good, though personally I prefer
>>>>>>> Zoomerang, but I'm with
>>>>>>> > Claudio, Lime Survey is great and we have
>>>>>>> an instance in place already that
>>>>>>> > we possibly could use before Oracle pulls the plug
>>>>>>> entirely.
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > Possible Andrew?
>>>>>>> All this infra is getting decommissioned as stuff moves to
>>>>>>> ASF. What's the link to the Lime Survey? Is that
>>> actually
>>>>>>> online?
>>>>>>> Even if it's still around, we should look for a more
>>>>>>> forward looking solution that we can reuse on future projects.
>>>>>>> (thus probably not a good idea to use, even if it's still
>>>>>>> around)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> AFAIR,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Lime Survey has a free online service. I am not sure of the
>>>>>> conditions (ad supported, fewer questions maybe) but it
>>>>>> should be enough for most purposes.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> And if we want to host this at Apache, I bet other projects would use
>>>>> it as well, probably also the Foundation.
>>>>>
>>>>> Pre-reqs are not particularly complicated:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>> http://docs.limesurvey.org/Installation&structure=English+Instructions+for+LimeSurvey#Make_sure_you_can_use_LimeSurvey_on_your_website
>>>>>
>>>>>> Pedro.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
Re: Moving ahead with the AOO logo and rebranding
Posted by Joe Schaefer <jo...@yahoo.com>.
In the time I've been mentoring this project, all I've seen
IBM people accomplish is to ratchet up organizational costs
for ASF Infra significantly. I hope you will relay this
along to your superiors in charge of resource allocation
as readily as you are willing to request new services be brought
up on behalf of this project.
----- Original Message -----
> From: Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>
> To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Cc:
> Sent: Monday, January 9, 2012 1:43 PM
> Subject: Re: Moving ahead with the AOO logo and rebranding
>
> On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 1:38 PM, Joe Schaefer <jo...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>> Look Rob, it is clear you lack any notion of the years of
>> history infra has had supporting new initiatives for projects
>> that were brought here, and have no grasp of how rude your
>> remarks are to the people who try to service this particular
>> project's needs and interests.
>>
>
> I've been through this several times. I know that everything new we
> ask for is considered impossible at first, or we're told to just go
> away, or that the request is an insult to the dignity of Infra. But I
> also know that with time and patience and careful explanation, it all
> becomes possible in the end, and is done quite well. I understand how
> it works. I've already been sent the "users manual" for Infra.
>
>> Go ask Geronimo people about their attitudes towards our wiki
>> deployments over the years to get some feel for the game you
>> are trying to play. We're long past those days now.
>>
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>
>>> To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>> Cc:
>>> Sent: Monday, January 9, 2012 1:34 PM
>>> Subject: Re: Moving ahead with the AOO logo and rebranding
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 1:31 PM, Joe Schaefer
> <jo...@yahoo.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>> -1. There is no shame in using 3rd party services for unofficial
>>>> business such as surveys and polls. Please get out of the nasty
>>>> habit of thinking that what's good for this project is good
> for
>>>> the org, it doesn't help matters at all and will only serve to
>>>> alienate infra people from addressing your specific needs.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Joe, there should be shame in your comments above. Please take your
>>> "nasty habit" comments elsewhere.
>>>
>>> I think this project has enhanced Apache and Infra's view of what
> is
>>> possible at Apache, and that this is to the benefit of all Apache
>>> projects.
>>>
>>> -Rob
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>>> From: Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>
>>>>> To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>>>> Cc:
>>>>> Sent: Monday, January 9, 2012 1:28 PM
>>>>> Subject: Re: Moving ahead with the AOO logo and rebranding
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 1:24 PM, Pedro Giffuni
> <pf...@apache.org>
>>> wrote:
>>>>>> ...
>>>>>> --- Lun 9/1/12, Andrew Rist
> <an...@oracle.com> ha
>>> scritto:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 1/8/2012 5:59 PM, Graham Lauder wrote:
>>>>>>> > <snip>
>>>>>>> > What did you have in mind for the survey itself?
>>>>>>> Were you thinking of
>>>>>>> > SurveyMonkey?
>>>>>>> > Survey monkey is good, though personally I
> prefer
>>>>>>> Zoomerang, but I'm with
>>>>>>> > Claudio, Lime Survey is great and we have
>>>>>>> an instance in place already that
>>>>>>> > we possibly could use before Oracle pulls the
> plug
>>>>>>> entirely.
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > Possible Andrew?
>>>>>>> All this infra is getting decommissioned as stuff
> moves to
>>>>>>> ASF. What's the link to the Lime Survey? Is
> that
>>> actually
>>>>>>> online?
>>>>>>> Even if it's still around, we should look for a
> more
>>>>>>> forward looking solution that we can reuse on future
> projects.
>>>>>>> (thus probably not a good idea to use, even if
> it's still
>>>>>>> around)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> AFAIR,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Lime Survey has a free online service. I am not sure of
> the
>>>>>> conditions (ad supported, fewer questions maybe) but it
>>>>>> should be enough for most purposes.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> And if we want to host this at Apache, I bet other projects
> would use
>>>>> it as well, probably also the Foundation.
>>>>>
>>>>> Pre-reqs are not particularly complicated:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
> http://docs.limesurvey.org/Installation&structure=English+Instructions+for+LimeSurvey#Make_sure_you_can_use_LimeSurvey_on_your_website
>>>>>
>>>>>> Pedro.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>
Re: Moving ahead with the AOO logo and rebranding
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 1:38 PM, Joe Schaefer <jo...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Look Rob, it is clear you lack any notion of the years of
> history infra has had supporting new initiatives for projects
> that were brought here, and have no grasp of how rude your
> remarks are to the people who try to service this particular
> project's needs and interests.
>
I've been through this several times. I know that everything new we
ask for is considered impossible at first, or we're told to just go
away, or that the request is an insult to the dignity of Infra. But I
also know that with time and patience and careful explanation, it all
becomes possible in the end, and is done quite well. I understand how
it works. I've already been sent the "users manual" for Infra.
> Go ask Geronimo people about their attitudes towards our wiki
> deployments over the years to get some feel for the game you
> are trying to play. We're long past those days now.
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>
>> To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
>> Cc:
>> Sent: Monday, January 9, 2012 1:34 PM
>> Subject: Re: Moving ahead with the AOO logo and rebranding
>>
>> On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 1:31 PM, Joe Schaefer <jo...@yahoo.com>
>> wrote:
>>> -1. There is no shame in using 3rd party services for unofficial
>>> business such as surveys and polls. Please get out of the nasty
>>> habit of thinking that what's good for this project is good for
>>> the org, it doesn't help matters at all and will only serve to
>>> alienate infra people from addressing your specific needs.
>>>
>>
>> Joe, there should be shame in your comments above. Please take your
>> "nasty habit" comments elsewhere.
>>
>> I think this project has enhanced Apache and Infra's view of what is
>> possible at Apache, and that this is to the benefit of all Apache
>> projects.
>>
>> -Rob
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>> From: Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>
>>>> To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>>> Cc:
>>>> Sent: Monday, January 9, 2012 1:28 PM
>>>> Subject: Re: Moving ahead with the AOO logo and rebranding
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 1:24 PM, Pedro Giffuni <pf...@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>>>>> ...
>>>>> --- Lun 9/1/12, Andrew Rist <an...@oracle.com> ha
>> scritto:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 1/8/2012 5:59 PM, Graham Lauder wrote:
>>>>>> > <snip>
>>>>>> > What did you have in mind for the survey itself?
>>>>>> Were you thinking of
>>>>>> > SurveyMonkey?
>>>>>> > Survey monkey is good, though personally I prefer
>>>>>> Zoomerang, but I'm with
>>>>>> > Claudio, Lime Survey is great and we have
>>>>>> an instance in place already that
>>>>>> > we possibly could use before Oracle pulls the plug
>>>>>> entirely.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > Possible Andrew?
>>>>>> All this infra is getting decommissioned as stuff moves to
>>>>>> ASF. What's the link to the Lime Survey? Is that
>> actually
>>>>>> online?
>>>>>> Even if it's still around, we should look for a more
>>>>>> forward looking solution that we can reuse on future projects.
>>>>>> (thus probably not a good idea to use, even if it's still
>>>>>> around)
>>>>>
>>>>> AFAIR,
>>>>>
>>>>> Lime Survey has a free online service. I am not sure of the
>>>>> conditions (ad supported, fewer questions maybe) but it
>>>>> should be enough for most purposes.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> And if we want to host this at Apache, I bet other projects would use
>>>> it as well, probably also the Foundation.
>>>>
>>>> Pre-reqs are not particularly complicated:
>>>>
>>>>
>> http://docs.limesurvey.org/Installation&structure=English+Instructions+for+LimeSurvey#Make_sure_you_can_use_LimeSurvey_on_your_website
>>>>
>>>>> Pedro.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>
Re: Moving ahead with the AOO logo and rebranding
Posted by Joe Schaefer <jo...@yahoo.com>.
Look Rob, it is clear you lack any notion of the years of
history infra has had supporting new initiatives for projects
that were brought here, and have no grasp of how rude your
remarks are to the people who try to service this particular
project's needs and interests.
Go ask Geronimo people about their attitudes towards our wiki
deployments over the years to get some feel for the game you
are trying to play. We're long past those days now.
----- Original Message -----
> From: Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>
> To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Cc:
> Sent: Monday, January 9, 2012 1:34 PM
> Subject: Re: Moving ahead with the AOO logo and rebranding
>
> On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 1:31 PM, Joe Schaefer <jo...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>> -1. There is no shame in using 3rd party services for unofficial
>> business such as surveys and polls. Please get out of the nasty
>> habit of thinking that what's good for this project is good for
>> the org, it doesn't help matters at all and will only serve to
>> alienate infra people from addressing your specific needs.
>>
>
> Joe, there should be shame in your comments above. Please take your
> "nasty habit" comments elsewhere.
>
> I think this project has enhanced Apache and Infra's view of what is
> possible at Apache, and that this is to the benefit of all Apache
> projects.
>
> -Rob
>
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>
>>> To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>> Cc:
>>> Sent: Monday, January 9, 2012 1:28 PM
>>> Subject: Re: Moving ahead with the AOO logo and rebranding
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 1:24 PM, Pedro Giffuni <pf...@apache.org>
> wrote:
>>>> ...
>>>> --- Lun 9/1/12, Andrew Rist <an...@oracle.com> ha
> scritto:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 1/8/2012 5:59 PM, Graham Lauder wrote:
>>>>> > <snip>
>>>>> > What did you have in mind for the survey itself?
>>>>> Were you thinking of
>>>>> > SurveyMonkey?
>>>>> > Survey monkey is good, though personally I prefer
>>>>> Zoomerang, but I'm with
>>>>> > Claudio, Lime Survey is great and we have
>>>>> an instance in place already that
>>>>> > we possibly could use before Oracle pulls the plug
>>>>> entirely.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Possible Andrew?
>>>>> All this infra is getting decommissioned as stuff moves to
>>>>> ASF. What's the link to the Lime Survey? Is that
> actually
>>>>> online?
>>>>> Even if it's still around, we should look for a more
>>>>> forward looking solution that we can reuse on future projects.
>>>>> (thus probably not a good idea to use, even if it's still
>>>>> around)
>>>>
>>>> AFAIR,
>>>>
>>>> Lime Survey has a free online service. I am not sure of the
>>>> conditions (ad supported, fewer questions maybe) but it
>>>> should be enough for most purposes.
>>>>
>>>
>>> And if we want to host this at Apache, I bet other projects would use
>>> it as well, probably also the Foundation.
>>>
>>> Pre-reqs are not particularly complicated:
>>>
>>>
> http://docs.limesurvey.org/Installation&structure=English+Instructions+for+LimeSurvey#Make_sure_you_can_use_LimeSurvey_on_your_website
>>>
>>>> Pedro.
>>>>
>>>
>
Re: Moving ahead with the AOO logo and rebranding
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 1:31 PM, Joe Schaefer <jo...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> -1. There is no shame in using 3rd party services for unofficial
> business such as surveys and polls. Please get out of the nasty
> habit of thinking that what's good for this project is good for
> the org, it doesn't help matters at all and will only serve to
> alienate infra people from addressing your specific needs.
>
Joe, there should be shame in your comments above. Please take your
"nasty habit" comments elsewhere.
I think this project has enhanced Apache and Infra's view of what is
possible at Apache, and that this is to the benefit of all Apache
projects.
-Rob
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>
>> To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
>> Cc:
>> Sent: Monday, January 9, 2012 1:28 PM
>> Subject: Re: Moving ahead with the AOO logo and rebranding
>>
>> On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 1:24 PM, Pedro Giffuni <pf...@apache.org> wrote:
>>> ...
>>> --- Lun 9/1/12, Andrew Rist <an...@oracle.com> ha scritto:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 1/8/2012 5:59 PM, Graham Lauder wrote:
>>>> > <snip>
>>>> > What did you have in mind for the survey itself?
>>>> Were you thinking of
>>>> > SurveyMonkey?
>>>> > Survey monkey is good, though personally I prefer
>>>> Zoomerang, but I'm with
>>>> > Claudio, Lime Survey is great and we have
>>>> an instance in place already that
>>>> > we possibly could use before Oracle pulls the plug
>>>> entirely.
>>>> >
>>>> > Possible Andrew?
>>>> All this infra is getting decommissioned as stuff moves to
>>>> ASF. What's the link to the Lime Survey? Is that actually
>>>> online?
>>>> Even if it's still around, we should look for a more
>>>> forward looking solution that we can reuse on future projects.
>>>> (thus probably not a good idea to use, even if it's still
>>>> around)
>>>
>>> AFAIR,
>>>
>>> Lime Survey has a free online service. I am not sure of the
>>> conditions (ad supported, fewer questions maybe) but it
>>> should be enough for most purposes.
>>>
>>
>> And if we want to host this at Apache, I bet other projects would use
>> it as well, probably also the Foundation.
>>
>> Pre-reqs are not particularly complicated:
>>
>> http://docs.limesurvey.org/Installation&structure=English+Instructions+for+LimeSurvey#Make_sure_you_can_use_LimeSurvey_on_your_website
>>
>>> Pedro.
>>>
>>
Re: Moving ahead with the AOO logo and rebranding
Posted by Joe Schaefer <jo...@yahoo.com>.
-1. There is no shame in using 3rd party services for unofficial
business such as surveys and polls. Please get out of the nasty
habit of thinking that what's good for this project is good for
the org, it doesn't help matters at all and will only serve to
alienate infra people from addressing your specific needs.
----- Original Message -----
> From: Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>
> To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Cc:
> Sent: Monday, January 9, 2012 1:28 PM
> Subject: Re: Moving ahead with the AOO logo and rebranding
>
> On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 1:24 PM, Pedro Giffuni <pf...@apache.org> wrote:
>> ...
>> --- Lun 9/1/12, Andrew Rist <an...@oracle.com> ha scritto:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 1/8/2012 5:59 PM, Graham Lauder wrote:
>>> > <snip>
>>> > What did you have in mind for the survey itself?
>>> Were you thinking of
>>> > SurveyMonkey?
>>> > Survey monkey is good, though personally I prefer
>>> Zoomerang, but I'm with
>>> > Claudio, Lime Survey is great and we have
>>> an instance in place already that
>>> > we possibly could use before Oracle pulls the plug
>>> entirely.
>>> >
>>> > Possible Andrew?
>>> All this infra is getting decommissioned as stuff moves to
>>> ASF. What's the link to the Lime Survey? Is that actually
>>> online?
>>> Even if it's still around, we should look for a more
>>> forward looking solution that we can reuse on future projects.
>>> (thus probably not a good idea to use, even if it's still
>>> around)
>>
>> AFAIR,
>>
>> Lime Survey has a free online service. I am not sure of the
>> conditions (ad supported, fewer questions maybe) but it
>> should be enough for most purposes.
>>
>
> And if we want to host this at Apache, I bet other projects would use
> it as well, probably also the Foundation.
>
> Pre-reqs are not particularly complicated:
>
> http://docs.limesurvey.org/Installation&structure=English+Instructions+for+LimeSurvey#Make_sure_you_can_use_LimeSurvey_on_your_website
>
>> Pedro.
>>
>
Re: Moving ahead with the AOO logo and rebranding
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 1:24 PM, Pedro Giffuni <pf...@apache.org> wrote:
> ...
> --- Lun 9/1/12, Andrew Rist <an...@oracle.com> ha scritto:
>
>>
>>
>> On 1/8/2012 5:59 PM, Graham Lauder wrote:
>> > <snip>
>> > What did you have in mind for the survey itself?
>> Were you thinking of
>> > SurveyMonkey?
>> > Survey monkey is good, though personally I prefer
>> Zoomerang, but I'm with
>> > Claudio, Lime Survey is great and we have
>> an instance in place already that
>> > we possibly could use before Oracle pulls the plug
>> entirely.
>> >
>> > Possible Andrew?
>> All this infra is getting decommissioned as stuff moves to
>> ASF. What's the link to the Lime Survey? Is that actually
>> online?
>> Even if it's still around, we should look for a more
>> forward looking solution that we can reuse on future projects.
>> (thus probably not a good idea to use, even if it's still
>> around)
>
> AFAIR,
>
> Lime Survey has a free online service. I am not sure of the
> conditions (ad supported, fewer questions maybe) but it
> should be enough for most purposes.
>
And if we want to host this at Apache, I bet other projects would use
it as well, probably also the Foundation.
Pre-reqs are not particularly complicated:
http://docs.limesurvey.org/Installation&structure=English+Instructions+for+LimeSurvey#Make_sure_you_can_use_LimeSurvey_on_your_website
> Pedro.
>
Re: Moving ahead with the AOO logo and rebranding
Posted by Pedro Giffuni <pf...@apache.org>.
...
--- Lun 9/1/12, Andrew Rist <an...@oracle.com> ha scritto:
>
>
> On 1/8/2012 5:59 PM, Graham Lauder wrote:
> > <snip>
> > What did you have in mind for the survey itself?
> Were you thinking of
> > SurveyMonkey?
> > Survey monkey is good, though personally I prefer
> Zoomerang, but I'm with
> > Claudio, Lime Survey is great and we have
> an instance in place already that
> > we possibly could use before Oracle pulls the plug
> entirely.
> >
> > Possible Andrew?
> All this infra is getting decommissioned as stuff moves to
> ASF. What's the link to the Lime Survey? Is that actually
> online?
> Even if it's still around, we should look for a more
> forward looking solution that we can reuse on future projects.
> (thus probably not a good idea to use, even if it's still
> around)
AFAIR,
Lime Survey has a free online service. I am not sure of the
conditions (ad supported, fewer questions maybe) but it
should be enough for most purposes.
Pedro.
Re: Moving ahead with the AOO logo and rebranding
Posted by Andrew Rist <an...@oracle.com>.
On 1/8/2012 5:59 PM, Graham Lauder wrote:
> <snip>
> What did you have in mind for the survey itself? Were you thinking of
> SurveyMonkey?
> Survey monkey is good, though personally I prefer Zoomerang, but I'm with
> Claudio, Lime Survey is great and we have an instance in place already that
> we possibly could use before Oracle pulls the plug entirely.
>
> Possible Andrew?
All this infra is getting decommissioned as stuff moves to ASF. What's
the link to the Lime Survey? Is that actually online?
Even if it's still around, we should look for a more forward looking
solution that we can reuse on future projects.
(thus probably not a good idea to use, even if it's still around)
Andrew
>
> I was considering a JIRA request to infra to install an instance on an AFS
> Server and that would be a definite for later. Right now I'm looking for a
> path of least resistance to some useful data.
Re: Moving ahead with the AOO logo and rebranding
Posted by Graham Lauder <g....@gmail.com>.
On Monday 09 Jan 2012 10:53:32 Rob Weir wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 8, 2012 at 4:46 PM, Graham Lauder <g....@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Monday 09 Jan 2012 06:51:26 Rob Weir wrote:
> <snip>
>
> >> > I've put together a prenotification to go out on the announce list to
> >> > ask people to participate in a survey and I'm putting together some
> >> > questions for the respondents to that mail to answer. This would be a
> >> > good apportunity to run this past a wider audience.
> >>
> >> It would be great if you posted your drafts to this list and/or the
> >> wiki.
> >
> > My apologies, I thought I had.
> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Survey+Design
>
> Great. I took a read over, and made some improvements to the
> pre-notification letter. For example, you said that we had "shifted
> the asserts" to Apache servers. But "shifting assets" is something
> one can go to prison for, at least in some regional varieties of
> English.
Yep looks great, I've removed the "going forward" as unnecessary verbiage.
>
> What did you have in mind for the survey itself? Were you thinking of
> SurveyMonkey?
Survey monkey is good, though personally I prefer Zoomerang, but I'm with
Claudio, Lime Survey is great and we have an instance in place already that
we possibly could use before Oracle pulls the plug entirely.
Possible Andrew?
I was considering a JIRA request to infra to install an instance on an AFS
Server and that would be a definite for later. Right now I'm looking for a
path of least resistance to some useful data.
>
> It would be good to have a draft of the survey itself ready before we
> sent out the pre-notification.
I'm working on that now, but I'm doing it offline. I'm on dialup and the wiki
can be problematic with timing out. However feel free in the meantime to
brainstorm questions on there, as the saying goes "No such thing as a stupid
question." or even just think out loud about what data is needed and I'll
frame questions to suit. I'll prune later for focus, priorities and
completion time.
Cheers
GL
Survey software (Was: Re: Moving ahead with the AOO logo and rebranding)
Posted by Claudio F Filho <fi...@gmail.com>.
Hi
On 08-01-2012 19:53, Rob Weir wrote:
> What did you have in mind for the survey itself? Were you thinking of
> SurveyMonkey?
In OOo, we had an instance[1] of LimeSurvey[2] (early called
PHPSurveyor), that is a *great* survey software.
[1]http://surveys.services.openoffice.org/
[2]http://limesurvey.org/
I think that is a good way to continue the use of this software. Many of
us already know the tool (more yet that is very user friendly).
Regards,
Claudio
Re: Moving ahead with the AOO logo and rebranding
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Sun, Jan 8, 2012 at 4:46 PM, Graham Lauder <g....@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Monday 09 Jan 2012 06:51:26 Rob Weir wrote:
<snip>
>> > I've put together a prenotification to go out on the announce list to ask
>> > people to participate in a survey and I'm putting together some questions
>> > for the respondents to that mail to answer. This would be a good
>> > apportunity to run this past a wider audience.
>>
>> It would be great if you posted your drafts to this list and/or the wiki.
>
> My apologies, I thought I had.
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Survey+Design
>
Great. I took a read over, and made some improvements to the
pre-notification letter. For example, you said that we had "shifted
the asserts" to Apache servers. But "shifting assets" is something
one can go to prison for, at least in some regional varieties of
English.
What did you have in mind for the survey itself? Were you thinking of
SurveyMonkey?
It would be good to have a draft of the survey itself ready before we
sent out the pre-notification.
> I'll stick to the wikl, too much gets lost on the maillist and I keep having
> to repeat myself.
>
> GL
>
Re: Moving ahead with the AOO logo and rebranding
Posted by Graham Lauder <g....@gmail.com>.
On Monday 09 Jan 2012 06:51:26 Rob Weir wrote:
[snip]
> >
> > Define the look and feel first, the logo should fit that.
> > Answers first:
> > What is our target Market
> > What is our aesthetic,
> > how do we want the market to percieve us.
> > How do they percieve us now,
> > do we want to change that perception,
> >
> > This is not about what the people on this list consider is aesthetically
> > pleasing to them, but what the people who are going to download the
> > software, think is best.
>
> It is useful to make a distinction between:
>
> 1) How we make decisions in this project
>
> and
>
> 2) How gather information to inform our individual opinions.
>
> In the end decision making in the project will be a factor of many
> things, including who has the initiative to do the work. We make
> decisions by consensus wherever possible (including "lazy consensus")
> and by voting where necessary. Our opinions might be fed by surveys
> and quantitative data, or by experience, or by debate on this list, or
> by a myriad of other factors.
>
> So in the end, yes, the decision will be made by the opinions of those
> on the list, specifically the PMC members. And in the end the success
> of the project will depend on us making a large number of right
> decisions, and a relatively small number of bad decision. But how we
> decide is as important as what we decide.
indeed, you are stating the obvious that is true for any pyramid shaped
organisation.
>
> > I would like to see a selection of branding elements, in particular:
> > Pallet, logo and name, several of each and then survey our "customers"
> > via the announce list to find their preferences. Any brand suggestions
> > should include all of the above including an explanation that defines
> > the aesthetic and where it positions the product in terms of the market
> > as well as target market.
>
> I believe that the value of the logo is even more critical for those
> who are potential users (the largest segment of the "target market"),
> and therefore are not on our announce list.
I made the point earlier that the announce@ooo list is our widest reach with
the shortest lead time. I also made the point that going off that list to the
wider audience, "a consummation d'voutly to be wished.." would cost money that
we don't have, or a large community on the ground, also that we don't have, we
have to make the best of a bad lot. So you're not telling me anything I don't
already know.
I made the offer to pick up a clipboard and do the hard yards, something that
is a waste of time in isolation. To get a true sampling it has to be done
world wide at around the same time. I asked if anyone else was prepared to do
it as well and was met with a deafening silence. So announce@ooo is the next
best track and it's something I can do solo.
>
> > Voting on the list is a particularly bad and limiting way to make these
> > sorts of decisions, especially without any research whatsoever.
>
> I agree that research can only help us make better decisions.
>
> > It has been itterated on a number of occasions that Apache is about
> > building communities, what better way to bring the community together
> > than giving them the opportunity to participate in a meaningful way and
> > demonstrating to them that the project actually cares about their
> > opinions.
>
> I think that you are demonstrating just fine that anyone can join this
> list and give their opinions.
That is the sort of patronising attitude that will keep this community small.
Imagine what it would be like if even a single percentage point of all OOo
users joined this list and voiced their opinions. The operation of a List
based decision process is predicated and relies on the user community staying
away. Lists do not scale well, especially in an unsophisticated user
community, a thousand messages a day would severely limit the ability for this
list, and thus community, to function in any meaningful way.
>
> > I've put together a prenotification to go out on the announce list to ask
> > people to participate in a survey and I'm putting together some questions
> > for the respondents to that mail to answer. This would be a good
> > apportunity to run this past a wider audience.
>
> It would be great if you posted your drafts to this list and/or the wiki.
My apologies, I thought I had.
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Survey+Design
I'll stick to the wikl, too much gets lost on the maillist and I keep having
to repeat myself.
GL
Re: Moving ahead with the AOO logo and rebranding
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Sun, Jan 8, 2012 at 9:55 AM, Graham Lauder <g....@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wednesday 04 Jan 2012 11:14:53 Rob Weir wrote:
>> On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 4:52 PM, Pedro Giffuni <pf...@apache.org> wrote:
>> > Hi Rob;
>> >
>> > JIC someone with a lot of spare time gives a try
>> > on this logo thing ... I have some questions.
>> >
>> > What would be the implications (if any) of using
>> > a legally licensed commercial font?
>>
>> Our ability to use such a logo would depend on the specific terms of
>> the font license.
>>
>> But in general, a commercial font license might lead to restrictions
>> on how we redistribute images using the font. For example, we might
>> only be able to redistribute rasterized bitmaps of a logo, but not a
>> scalable vector image that included a font glyph definition as well.
>> A commercial font might also restrict who in the project is able to
>> modify the logo or create derivative logos for the benefit of the
>> project.
>>
>> I'm not sure any of these are killer objections to the use of a
>> commercial font. But I think we'd want a strong design reason for not
>> using a font with few or no restrictions.
>
> +1, the old font was a commercial one: Frutiger, which caused all sorts of
> issues when being used by the community Artists. There are plenty of similar
> fonts about. The "best" solution was Liberation Sans at 60% IIRC. But that
> was just to try and maintain the old logo look as close as possible.
>
> My personal opinion is; if we can't bundle the font with the software then we
> shouldn't use it. Of course, it should be added there is absolutely no
> reason why a font should be used at all in the main logo. Taglines and
> positioners perhaps and a free font should be used in things such as
> splashscreens, but the logo can be a graphic that looks like text. I've added
> a couple of proposals based on a graphic that was created in a vector editor,
> no fonts used, created as needed.
>
> To much focus on Text/Font style in branding is a part of an old paradigm.
> This was put in a style guide so that signwriters could easily retain
> corporate branding out on the high street. We don't do High street, we are
> internet based. We just have to make our branding easily available to those
> who want to distribute it.
> That is is the power of the internet after all.
>
>
>>
>> > Ariel pointed to some nice splash screens done
>> > previously in the Wiki, can those be (re)used
>> > as a starting point?
>>
>> I have no objections. But I think right now we're talking about the
>> general theme of the Drew's logo proposal, i.e., the distinctive
>> design elements of:
>>
>> - text
>> - color
>
> Broader than this, we are talking pallet, aesthetics, emotive response.
>
>> - type face
>
> necessary, only if a designed font face is used as part of the graphic
>
>> - spacing
>> - background
>> - embellishment.
>> - and so on
>>
>> If there is consensus on that, then there will be follow up design
>> work to incorporate that logo into a variety of locations, including a
>> splash screen. But I think there is a hesitation to invest in that
>> additional work until we're sure the basic design is OK.
>
> Which of course is completely the wrong way round.
>
> Define the look and feel first, the logo should fit that.
> Answers first:
> What is our target Market
> What is our aesthetic,
> how do we want the market to percieve us.
> How do they percieve us now,
> do we want to change that perception,
>
> This is not about what the people on this list consider is aesthetically
> pleasing to them, but what the people who are going to download the software,
> think is best.
>
It is useful to make a distinction between:
1) How we make decisions in this project
and
2) How gather information to inform our individual opinions.
In the end decision making in the project will be a factor of many
things, including who has the initiative to do the work. We make
decisions by consensus wherever possible (including "lazy consensus")
and by voting where necessary. Our opinions might be fed by surveys
and quantitative data, or by experience, or by debate on this list, or
by a myriad of other factors.
So in the end, yes, the decision will be made by the opinions of those
on the list, specifically the PMC members. And in the end the success
of the project will depend on us making a large number of right
decisions, and a relatively small number of bad decision. But how we
decide is as important as what we decide.
> I would like to see a selection of branding elements, in particular: Pallet,
> logo and name, several of each and then survey our "customers" via the
> announce list to find their preferences. Any brand suggestions should include
> all of the above including an explanation that defines the aesthetic and where
> it positions the product in terms of the market as well as target market.
>
I believe that the value of the logo is even more critical for those
who are potential users (the largest segment of the "target market"),
and therefore are not on our announce list.
> Voting on the list is a particularly bad and limiting way to make these sorts
> of decisions, especially without any research whatsoever.
>
I agree that research can only help us make better decisions.
> It has been itterated on a number of occasions that Apache is about building
> communities, what better way to bring the community together than giving them
> the opportunity to participate in a meaningful way and demonstrating to them
> that the project actually cares about their opinions.
>
I think that you are demonstrating just fine that anyone can join this
list and give their opinions.
> I've put together a prenotification to go out on the announce list to ask
> people to participate in a survey and I'm putting together some questions for
> the respondents to that mail to answer. This would be a good apportunity to
> run this past a wider audience.
>
It would be great if you posted your drafts to this list and/or the wiki.
>
> Cheers
> GL
>
>
>>
>> -Rob
>>
>> > cheers,
>> >
>> > Pedro.
>> >
>> > --- Mar 3/1/12, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> ha scritto:
>> > ...
>> >
>> >> 2012/1/3 Pavel Janík <Pa...@janik.cz>:
>> >> >> we would use (TM). At some point, say after we
>> >>
>> >> actually have a
>> >>
>> >> >> release, then we could ask Apache to pursue
>> >>
>> >> registration for "Apache
>> >>
>> >> >> OpenOffice"
>> >> >
>> >> > Why would we do so if we know that Sun/Oracle could
>> >>
>> >> not get it registered (and thus have chosen OpenOffice.org
>> >> instead)?
>> >>
>> >> We're talking about the full mark, "Apache
>> >> OpenOffice". I have no
>> >> reason to think this could not be registered.
>> >>
>> >> In any case, we already discussed this, voted, and the
>> >> choice was
>> >> "Apache OpenOffice". We're now talking about the
>> >> graphical ogo that
>> >> will reflect that name.
>> >>
>> >> > --
>> >> > Pavel Janík
Re: Moving ahead with the AOO logo and rebranding
Posted by Pedro Giffuni <pf...@apache.org>.
FWIW;
Just a proof of concept ...
http://people.apache.org/~pfg/ApacheOO.gif
(Droid Sans 80%)
cheers,
Pedro.
--- Lun 9/1/12, Graham Lauder <g....@gmail.com> ha scritto:
...
>
> I did a little research and the number of fonts with hinting
> enabled is miniscule and all commercial. Also Post script
> doesn't do hinting so it's
> probably best to not concern ourselves with it.
>
> Cheers
> GL
>
Re: Moving ahead with the AOO logo and rebranding
Posted by Graham Lauder <g....@gmail.com>.
On Monday 09 Jan 2012 05:22:11 Rob Weir wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 8, 2012 at 9:09 AM, drew <dr...@baseanswers.com> wrote:
> > On Mon, 2012-01-09 at 03:55 +1300, Graham Lauder wrote:
> >> On Wednesday 04 Jan 2012 11:14:53 Rob Weir wrote:
> >> > On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 4:52 PM, Pedro Giffuni <pf...@apache.org> wrote:
> >> > > Hi Rob;
> >> > >
> >> > > JIC someone with a lot of spare time gives a try
> >> > > on this logo thing ... I have some questions.
> >> > >
> >> > > What would be the implications (if any) of using
> >> > > a legally licensed commercial font?
> >> >
> >> > Our ability to use such a logo would depend on the specific terms of
> >> > the font license.
> >> >
> >> > But in general, a commercial font license might lead to restrictions
> >> > on how we redistribute images using the font. For example, we might
> >> > only be able to redistribute rasterized bitmaps of a logo, but not a
> >> > scalable vector image that included a font glyph definition as well.
> >> > A commercial font might also restrict who in the project is able to
> >> > modify the logo or create derivative logos for the benefit of the
> >> > project.
> >> >
> >> > I'm not sure any of these are killer objections to the use of a
> >> > commercial font. But I think we'd want a strong design reason for not
> >> > using a font with few or no restrictions.
> >>
> >> +1, the old font was a commercial one: Frutiger, which caused all sorts
> >> of issues when being used by the community Artists. There are plenty
> >> of similar fonts about. The "best" solution was Liberation Sans at 60%
> >> IIRC. But that was just to try and maintain the old logo look as close
> >> as possible.
> >>
> >> My personal opinion is; if we can't bundle the font with the software
> >> then we shouldn't use it. Of course, it should be added there is
> >> absolutely no reason why a font should be used at all in the main logo.
> >> Taglines and positioners perhaps and a free font should be used in
> >> things such as splashscreens, but the logo can be a graphic that looks
> >> like text. I've added a couple of proposals based on a graphic that
> >> was created in a vector editor, no fonts used, created as needed.
> >
> > On that last point I agree - and I suppose I started all this my
> > mentioning which font I used - the final is not font based, it is
> > paths...
>
> If we don't need to scale the logo, then that is fine. But text -- at
> least with high quality fonts -- is not scaled proportionately in the
> way you would a simple SVG shape. In order to preserve a pleasing,
> balanced appearance at small and large sizes, real fonts do much more
> complicated things, e.g. "manual hinting".
>
> If we want to have the optimal appearance, at various scales, then we
> may need to take this into account.
I did a little research and the number of fonts with hinting enabled is
miniscule and all commercial. Also Post script doesn't do hinting so it's
probably best to not concern ourselves with it.
Cheers
GL
>
> >> To much focus on Text/Font style in branding is a part of an old
> >> paradigm. This was put in a style guide so that signwriters could
> >> easily retain corporate branding out on the high street. We don't do
> >> High street, we are internet based. We just have to make our branding
> >> easily available to those who want to distribute it.
> >> That is is the power of the internet after all.
> >>
> >> > > Ariel pointed to some nice splash screens done
> >> > > previously in the Wiki, can those be (re)used
> >> > > as a starting point?
> >> >
> >> > I have no objections. But I think right now we're talking about the
> >> > general theme of the Drew's logo proposal, i.e., the distinctive
> >> > design elements of:
> >> >
> >> > - text
> >> > - color
> >>
> >> Broader than this, we are talking pallet, aesthetics, emotive response.
> >>
> >> > - type face
> >>
> >> necessary, only if a designed font face is used as part of the graphic
> >>
> >> > - spacing
> >> > - background
> >> > - embellishment.
> >> > - and so on
> >> >
> >> > If there is consensus on that, then there will be follow up design
> >> > work to incorporate that logo into a variety of locations, including a
> >> > splash screen. But I think there is a hesitation to invest in that
> >> > additional work until we're sure the basic design is OK.
> >>
> >> Which of course is completely the wrong way round.
> >>
> >> Define the look and feel first, the logo should fit that.
> >> Answers first:
> >> What is our target Market
> >> What is our aesthetic,
> >> how do we want the market to percieve us.
> >> How do they percieve us now,
> >> do we want to change that perception,
> >>
> >> This is not about what the people on this list consider is aesthetically
> >> pleasing to them, but what the people who are going to download the
> >> software, think is best.
> >>
> >> I would like to see a selection of branding elements, in particular:
> >> Pallet, logo and name, several of each and then survey our "customers"
> >> via the announce list to find their preferences. Any brand suggestions
> >> should include all of the above including an explanation that defines
> >> the aesthetic and where it positions the product in terms of the market
> >> as well as target market.
> >>
> >> Voting on the list is a particularly bad and limiting way to make these
> >> sorts of decisions, especially without any research whatsoever.
> >>
> >> It has been itterated on a number of occasions that Apache is about
> >> building communities, what better way to bring the community together
> >> than giving them the opportunity to participate in a meaningful way and
> >> demonstrating to them that the project actually cares about their
> >> opinions.
> >>
> >> I've put together a prenotification to go out on the announce list to
> >> ask people to participate in a survey and I'm putting together some
> >> questions for the respondents to that mail to answer. This would be a
> >> good apportunity to run this past a wider audience.
> >>
> >>
> >> Cheers
> >> GL
> >>
> >> > -Rob
> >> >
> >> > > cheers,
> >> > >
> >> > > Pedro.
> >> > >
> >> > > --- Mar 3/1/12, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> ha scritto:
> >> > > ...
> >> > >
> >> > >> 2012/1/3 Pavel Janík <Pa...@janik.cz>:
> >> > >> >> we would use (TM). At some point, say after we
> >> > >>
> >> > >> actually have a
> >> > >>
> >> > >> >> release, then we could ask Apache to pursue
> >> > >>
> >> > >> registration for "Apache
> >> > >>
> >> > >> >> OpenOffice"
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> > Why would we do so if we know that Sun/Oracle could
> >> > >>
> >> > >> not get it registered (and thus have chosen OpenOffice.org
> >> > >> instead)?
> >> > >>
> >> > >> We're talking about the full mark, "Apache
> >> > >> OpenOffice". I have no
> >> > >> reason to think this could not be registered.
> >> > >>
> >> > >> In any case, we already discussed this, voted, and the
> >> > >> choice was
> >> > >> "Apache OpenOffice". We're now talking about the
> >> > >> graphical ogo that
> >> > >> will reflect that name.
> >> > >>
> >> > >> > --
> >> > >> > Pavel Janík
Re: Moving ahead with the AOO logo and rebranding
Posted by Graham Lauder <g....@gmail.com>.
On Monday 09 Jan 2012 05:22:11 Rob Weir wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 8, 2012 at 9:09 AM, drew <dr...@baseanswers.com> wrote:
> > On Mon, 2012-01-09 at 03:55 +1300, Graham Lauder wrote:
> >> On Wednesday 04 Jan 2012 11:14:53 Rob Weir wrote:
> >> > On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 4:52 PM, Pedro Giffuni <pf...@apache.org> wrote:
> >> > > Hi Rob;
> >> > >
> >> > > JIC someone with a lot of spare time gives a try
> >> > > on this logo thing ... I have some questions.
> >> > >
> >> > > What would be the implications (if any) of using
> >> > > a legally licensed commercial font?
> >> >
> >> > Our ability to use such a logo would depend on the specific terms of
> >> > the font license.
> >> >
> >> > But in general, a commercial font license might lead to restrictions
> >> > on how we redistribute images using the font. For example, we might
> >> > only be able to redistribute rasterized bitmaps of a logo, but not a
> >> > scalable vector image that included a font glyph definition as well.
> >> > A commercial font might also restrict who in the project is able to
> >> > modify the logo or create derivative logos for the benefit of the
> >> > project.
> >> >
> >> > I'm not sure any of these are killer objections to the use of a
> >> > commercial font. But I think we'd want a strong design reason for not
> >> > using a font with few or no restrictions.
> >>
> >> +1, the old font was a commercial one: Frutiger, which caused all sorts
> >> of issues when being used by the community Artists. There are plenty
> >> of similar fonts about. The "best" solution was Liberation Sans at 60%
> >> IIRC. But that was just to try and maintain the old logo look as close
> >> as possible.
> >>
> >> My personal opinion is; if we can't bundle the font with the software
> >> then we shouldn't use it. Of course, it should be added there is
> >> absolutely no reason why a font should be used at all in the main logo.
> >> Taglines and positioners perhaps and a free font should be used in
> >> things such as splashscreens, but the logo can be a graphic that looks
> >> like text. I've added a couple of proposals based on a graphic that
> >> was created in a vector editor, no fonts used, created as needed.
> >
> > On that last point I agree - and I suppose I started all this my
> > mentioning which font I used - the final is not font based, it is
> > paths...
>
> If we don't need to scale the logo, then that is fine. But text -- at
> least with high quality fonts -- is not scaled proportionately in the
> way you would a simple SVG shape. In order to preserve a pleasing,
> balanced appearance at small and large sizes, real fonts do much more
> complicated things, e.g. "manual hinting".
>
> If we want to have the optimal appearance, at various scales, then we
> may need to take this into account.
>
Unnecessary, the old logo was fixed and always had been, it was never a line
of text, it was a graphic made up of textual elements. We are internet based,
scaling is not really an issue as scaling ratios never get to even 25:1.
Whereas is in print media and signwriting they are dealing in the 1000s. If
we get to the point of hanging the logo in Times Square we can deal with that
issue when it arises.
Cheers
GL
RE: Moving ahead with the AOO logo and rebranding
Posted by "Dennis E. Hamilton" <de...@acm.org>.
Rob,
Agreed. Font scaling is an important second-order consideration after we stabilize on the essential appearance of each major branding element.
I notice this problem seems to apply to some of the smaller versions that Drew and others have posted, and it will have to be addressed.
- Dennis
-----Original Message-----
From: Rob Weir [mailto:robweir@apache.org]
Sent: Sunday, January 08, 2012 08:22
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: Moving ahead with the AOO logo and rebranding
[ ... ]
If we don't need to scale the logo, then that is fine. But text -- at
least with high quality fonts -- is not scaled proportionately in the
way you would a simple SVG shape. In order to preserve a pleasing,
balanced appearance at small and large sizes, real fonts do much more
complicated things, e.g. "manual hinting".
If we want to have the optimal appearance, at various scales, then we
may need to take this into account.
[ ... ]
Re: Moving ahead with the AOO logo and rebranding
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Sun, Jan 8, 2012 at 9:09 AM, drew <dr...@baseanswers.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 2012-01-09 at 03:55 +1300, Graham Lauder wrote:
>> On Wednesday 04 Jan 2012 11:14:53 Rob Weir wrote:
>> > On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 4:52 PM, Pedro Giffuni <pf...@apache.org> wrote:
>> > > Hi Rob;
>> > >
>> > > JIC someone with a lot of spare time gives a try
>> > > on this logo thing ... I have some questions.
>> > >
>> > > What would be the implications (if any) of using
>> > > a legally licensed commercial font?
>> >
>> > Our ability to use such a logo would depend on the specific terms of
>> > the font license.
>> >
>> > But in general, a commercial font license might lead to restrictions
>> > on how we redistribute images using the font. For example, we might
>> > only be able to redistribute rasterized bitmaps of a logo, but not a
>> > scalable vector image that included a font glyph definition as well.
>> > A commercial font might also restrict who in the project is able to
>> > modify the logo or create derivative logos for the benefit of the
>> > project.
>> >
>> > I'm not sure any of these are killer objections to the use of a
>> > commercial font. But I think we'd want a strong design reason for not
>> > using a font with few or no restrictions.
>>
>> +1, the old font was a commercial one: Frutiger, which caused all sorts of
>> issues when being used by the community Artists. There are plenty of similar
>> fonts about. The "best" solution was Liberation Sans at 60% IIRC. But that
>> was just to try and maintain the old logo look as close as possible.
>>
>> My personal opinion is; if we can't bundle the font with the software then we
>> shouldn't use it. Of course, it should be added there is absolutely no
>> reason why a font should be used at all in the main logo. Taglines and
>> positioners perhaps and a free font should be used in things such as
>> splashscreens, but the logo can be a graphic that looks like text. I've added
>> a couple of proposals based on a graphic that was created in a vector editor,
>> no fonts used, created as needed.
>
> On that last point I agree - and I suppose I started all this my
> mentioning which font I used - the final is not font based, it is
> paths...
>
If we don't need to scale the logo, then that is fine. But text -- at
least with high quality fonts -- is not scaled proportionately in the
way you would a simple SVG shape. In order to preserve a pleasing,
balanced appearance at small and large sizes, real fonts do much more
complicated things, e.g. "manual hinting".
If we want to have the optimal appearance, at various scales, then we
may need to take this into account.
>>
>> To much focus on Text/Font style in branding is a part of an old paradigm.
>> This was put in a style guide so that signwriters could easily retain
>> corporate branding out on the high street. We don't do High street, we are
>> internet based. We just have to make our branding easily available to those
>> who want to distribute it.
>> That is is the power of the internet after all.
>>
>>
>> >
>> > > Ariel pointed to some nice splash screens done
>> > > previously in the Wiki, can those be (re)used
>> > > as a starting point?
>> >
>> > I have no objections. But I think right now we're talking about the
>> > general theme of the Drew's logo proposal, i.e., the distinctive
>> > design elements of:
>> >
>> > - text
>> > - color
>>
>> Broader than this, we are talking pallet, aesthetics, emotive response.
>>
>> > - type face
>>
>> necessary, only if a designed font face is used as part of the graphic
>>
>> > - spacing
>> > - background
>> > - embellishment.
>> > - and so on
>> >
>> > If there is consensus on that, then there will be follow up design
>> > work to incorporate that logo into a variety of locations, including a
>> > splash screen. But I think there is a hesitation to invest in that
>> > additional work until we're sure the basic design is OK.
>>
>> Which of course is completely the wrong way round.
>>
>> Define the look and feel first, the logo should fit that.
>> Answers first:
>> What is our target Market
>> What is our aesthetic,
>> how do we want the market to percieve us.
>> How do they percieve us now,
>> do we want to change that perception,
>>
>> This is not about what the people on this list consider is aesthetically
>> pleasing to them, but what the people who are going to download the software,
>> think is best.
>>
>> I would like to see a selection of branding elements, in particular: Pallet,
>> logo and name, several of each and then survey our "customers" via the
>> announce list to find their preferences. Any brand suggestions should include
>> all of the above including an explanation that defines the aesthetic and where
>> it positions the product in terms of the market as well as target market.
>>
>> Voting on the list is a particularly bad and limiting way to make these sorts
>> of decisions, especially without any research whatsoever.
>>
>> It has been itterated on a number of occasions that Apache is about building
>> communities, what better way to bring the community together than giving them
>> the opportunity to participate in a meaningful way and demonstrating to them
>> that the project actually cares about their opinions.
>>
>> I've put together a prenotification to go out on the announce list to ask
>> people to participate in a survey and I'm putting together some questions for
>> the respondents to that mail to answer. This would be a good apportunity to
>> run this past a wider audience.
>>
>>
>> Cheers
>> GL
>>
>>
>> >
>> > -Rob
>> >
>> > > cheers,
>> > >
>> > > Pedro.
>> > >
>> > > --- Mar 3/1/12, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> ha scritto:
>> > > ...
>> > >
>> > >> 2012/1/3 Pavel Janík <Pa...@janik.cz>:
>> > >> >> we would use (TM). At some point, say after we
>> > >>
>> > >> actually have a
>> > >>
>> > >> >> release, then we could ask Apache to pursue
>> > >>
>> > >> registration for "Apache
>> > >>
>> > >> >> OpenOffice"
>> > >> >
>> > >> > Why would we do so if we know that Sun/Oracle could
>> > >>
>> > >> not get it registered (and thus have chosen OpenOffice.org
>> > >> instead)?
>> > >>
>> > >> We're talking about the full mark, "Apache
>> > >> OpenOffice". I have no
>> > >> reason to think this could not be registered.
>> > >>
>> > >> In any case, we already discussed this, voted, and the
>> > >> choice was
>> > >> "Apache OpenOffice". We're now talking about the
>> > >> graphical ogo that
>> > >> will reflect that name.
>> > >>
>> > >> > --
>> > >> > Pavel Janík
>>
>
>
Re: Moving ahead with the AOO logo and rebranding
Posted by drew <dr...@baseanswers.com>.
On Mon, 2012-01-09 at 03:55 +1300, Graham Lauder wrote:
> On Wednesday 04 Jan 2012 11:14:53 Rob Weir wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 4:52 PM, Pedro Giffuni <pf...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > Hi Rob;
> > >
> > > JIC someone with a lot of spare time gives a try
> > > on this logo thing ... I have some questions.
> > >
> > > What would be the implications (if any) of using
> > > a legally licensed commercial font?
> >
> > Our ability to use such a logo would depend on the specific terms of
> > the font license.
> >
> > But in general, a commercial font license might lead to restrictions
> > on how we redistribute images using the font. For example, we might
> > only be able to redistribute rasterized bitmaps of a logo, but not a
> > scalable vector image that included a font glyph definition as well.
> > A commercial font might also restrict who in the project is able to
> > modify the logo or create derivative logos for the benefit of the
> > project.
> >
> > I'm not sure any of these are killer objections to the use of a
> > commercial font. But I think we'd want a strong design reason for not
> > using a font with few or no restrictions.
>
> +1, the old font was a commercial one: Frutiger, which caused all sorts of
> issues when being used by the community Artists. There are plenty of similar
> fonts about. The "best" solution was Liberation Sans at 60% IIRC. But that
> was just to try and maintain the old logo look as close as possible.
>
> My personal opinion is; if we can't bundle the font with the software then we
> shouldn't use it. Of course, it should be added there is absolutely no
> reason why a font should be used at all in the main logo. Taglines and
> positioners perhaps and a free font should be used in things such as
> splashscreens, but the logo can be a graphic that looks like text. I've added
> a couple of proposals based on a graphic that was created in a vector editor,
> no fonts used, created as needed.
On that last point I agree - and I suppose I started all this my
mentioning which font I used - the final is not font based, it is
paths...
>
> To much focus on Text/Font style in branding is a part of an old paradigm.
> This was put in a style guide so that signwriters could easily retain
> corporate branding out on the high street. We don't do High street, we are
> internet based. We just have to make our branding easily available to those
> who want to distribute it.
> That is is the power of the internet after all.
>
>
> >
> > > Ariel pointed to some nice splash screens done
> > > previously in the Wiki, can those be (re)used
> > > as a starting point?
> >
> > I have no objections. But I think right now we're talking about the
> > general theme of the Drew's logo proposal, i.e., the distinctive
> > design elements of:
> >
> > - text
> > - color
>
> Broader than this, we are talking pallet, aesthetics, emotive response.
>
> > - type face
>
> necessary, only if a designed font face is used as part of the graphic
>
> > - spacing
> > - background
> > - embellishment.
> > - and so on
> >
> > If there is consensus on that, then there will be follow up design
> > work to incorporate that logo into a variety of locations, including a
> > splash screen. But I think there is a hesitation to invest in that
> > additional work until we're sure the basic design is OK.
>
> Which of course is completely the wrong way round.
>
> Define the look and feel first, the logo should fit that.
> Answers first:
> What is our target Market
> What is our aesthetic,
> how do we want the market to percieve us.
> How do they percieve us now,
> do we want to change that perception,
>
> This is not about what the people on this list consider is aesthetically
> pleasing to them, but what the people who are going to download the software,
> think is best.
>
> I would like to see a selection of branding elements, in particular: Pallet,
> logo and name, several of each and then survey our "customers" via the
> announce list to find their preferences. Any brand suggestions should include
> all of the above including an explanation that defines the aesthetic and where
> it positions the product in terms of the market as well as target market.
>
> Voting on the list is a particularly bad and limiting way to make these sorts
> of decisions, especially without any research whatsoever.
>
> It has been itterated on a number of occasions that Apache is about building
> communities, what better way to bring the community together than giving them
> the opportunity to participate in a meaningful way and demonstrating to them
> that the project actually cares about their opinions.
>
> I've put together a prenotification to go out on the announce list to ask
> people to participate in a survey and I'm putting together some questions for
> the respondents to that mail to answer. This would be a good apportunity to
> run this past a wider audience.
>
>
> Cheers
> GL
>
>
> >
> > -Rob
> >
> > > cheers,
> > >
> > > Pedro.
> > >
> > > --- Mar 3/1/12, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> ha scritto:
> > > ...
> > >
> > >> 2012/1/3 Pavel Janík <Pa...@janik.cz>:
> > >> >> we would use (TM). At some point, say after we
> > >>
> > >> actually have a
> > >>
> > >> >> release, then we could ask Apache to pursue
> > >>
> > >> registration for "Apache
> > >>
> > >> >> OpenOffice"
> > >> >
> > >> > Why would we do so if we know that Sun/Oracle could
> > >>
> > >> not get it registered (and thus have chosen OpenOffice.org
> > >> instead)?
> > >>
> > >> We're talking about the full mark, "Apache
> > >> OpenOffice". I have no
> > >> reason to think this could not be registered.
> > >>
> > >> In any case, we already discussed this, voted, and the
> > >> choice was
> > >> "Apache OpenOffice". We're now talking about the
> > >> graphical ogo that
> > >> will reflect that name.
> > >>
> > >> > --
> > >> > Pavel Janík
>
Re: Moving ahead with the AOO logo and rebranding
Posted by Graham Lauder <g....@gmail.com>.
On Monday 09 Jan 2012 17:57:55 Pedro Giffuni wrote:
> Thanks Graham!
>
> --- Dom 8/1/12, Graham Lauder <g....@gmail.com> ha scritto:
> ...
>
> > > I'm not sure any of these are killer objections to the
> > > use of a commercial font. But I think we'd want a strong
> > > design reason for not using a font with few or no
> > > restrictions.
> >
> > +1, the old font was a commercial one: Frutiger, which
> > caused all sorts of issues when being used by the
> > community Artists.
> > There are plenty of similar fonts about. The "best"
> > solution was Liberation Sans at 60% IIRC. But that
> > was just to try and maintain the old logo look as close as
> > possible.
>
> FWIW,
>
> Android fonts are under AL2, and there's also the plus that
> they should display very well on mobile devices which have
> become so important nowadays. FWIW, I am playing (just playing)
> with Android Sans at 60% but my uneducated eye doesn't notice much
> difference.
The biggest problem with using many typefaces in shortened form is that if the
contrast is low on the original typeface, you can end up with a negative
contrast.
This was one of the disadvantages of the Liberation and Deja Vu font families
at anything under 80% a stem would end up thinner than the shoulder, most
obviously in an O. Additionally, Frutiger had a high contrast so to maintain
the look was difficult just by shortening typeface.
Cheers
GL
> I certainly agree the font is not as important as so many
> other factors that should be taken into account.
>
> I haven't yet got to the aesthetic and general marketing issues
> you mentioned so there is truly a lot to think and this is not
> really anywhere near my priorities lately so no promises
> from my side, but I surely had to say that you hit the nail in
> this posting.
>
> Pedro.
>
Re: Moving ahead with the AOO logo and rebranding
Posted by Pedro Giffuni <pf...@apache.org>.
Thanks Graham!
--- Dom 8/1/12, Graham Lauder <g....@gmail.com> ha scritto:
...
> > I'm not sure any of these are killer objections to the
> > use of a commercial font. But I think we'd want a strong
> > design reason for not using a font with few or no
> > restrictions.
>
> +1, the old font was a commercial one: Frutiger, which
> caused all sorts of issues when being used by the
> community Artists.
> There are plenty of similar fonts about. The "best"
> solution was Liberation Sans at 60% IIRC. But that
> was just to try and maintain the old logo look as close as
> possible.
>
FWIW,
Android fonts are under AL2, and there's also the plus that
they should display very well on mobile devices which have
become so important nowadays. FWIW, I am playing (just playing)
with Android Sans at 60% but my uneducated eye doesn't notice much difference. I certainly agree the font is not as important as
so many other factors that should be taken into account.
I haven't yet got to the aesthetic and general marketing issues
you mentioned so there is truly a lot to think and this is not
really anywhere near my priorities lately so no promises
from my side, but I surely had to say that you hit the nail in
this posting.
Pedro.
> My personal opinion is; if we can't bundle the font with
> the software then we
> shouldn't use it. Of course, it should be
> added there is absolutely no
> reason why a font should be used at all in the main logo.
> Taglines and
> positioners perhaps and a free font should be used in
> things such as
> splashscreens, but the logo can be a graphic that looks
> like text. I've added
> a couple of proposals based on a graphic that was created
> in a vector editor,
> no fonts used, created as needed.
>
> To much focus on Text/Font style in branding is a part of
> an old paradigm.
> This was put in a style guide so that signwriters could
> easily retain
> corporate branding out on the high street. We don't
> do High street, we are
> internet based. We just have to make our branding
> easily available to those
> who want to distribute it.
> That is is the power of the internet after all.
>
>
> >
> > > Ariel pointed to some nice splash screens done
> > > previously in the Wiki, can those be (re)used
> > > as a starting point?
> >
> > I have no objections. But I think right now
> we're talking about the
> > general theme of the Drew's logo proposal, i.e., the
> distinctive
> > design elements of:
> >
> > - text
> > - color
>
> Broader than this, we are talking pallet, aesthetics,
> emotive response.
>
> > - type face
>
> necessary, only if a designed font face is used as part of
> the graphic
>
> > - spacing
> > - background
> > - embellishment.
> > - and so on
> >
> > If there is consensus on that, then there will be
> follow up design
> > work to incorporate that logo into a variety of
> locations, including a
> > splash screen. But I think there is a hesitation
> to invest in that
> > additional work until we're sure the basic design is
> OK.
>
> Which of course is completely the wrong way round.
>
> Define the look and feel first, the logo should fit
> that.
> Answers first:
> What is our target Market
> What is our aesthetic,
> how do we want the market to percieve us.
> How do they percieve us now,
> do we want to change that perception,
>
> This is not about what the people on this list consider is
> aesthetically
> pleasing to them, but what the people who are going to
> download the software,
> think is best.
>
> I would like to see a selection of branding elements, in
> particular: Pallet,
> logo and name, several of each and then survey our
> "customers" via the
> announce list to find their preferences. Any brand
> suggestions should include
> all of the above including an explanation that defines the
> aesthetic and where
> it positions the product in terms of the market as well as
> target market.
>
> Voting on the list is a particularly bad and limiting way
> to make these sorts
> of decisions, especially without any research whatsoever.
>
> It has been itterated on a number of occasions that
> Apache is about building
> communities, what better way to bring the community
> together than giving them
> the opportunity to participate in a meaningful way and
> demonstrating to them
> that the project actually cares about their opinions.
>
> I've put together a prenotification to go out on the
> announce list to ask
> people to participate in a survey and I'm putting together
> some questions for
> the respondents to that mail to answer. This would be a
> good apportunity to
> run this past a wider audience.
>
>
> Cheers
> GL
>
>
> >
> > -Rob
> >
> > > cheers,
> > >
> > > Pedro.
> > >
> > > --- Mar 3/1/12, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>
> ha scritto:
> > > ...
> > >
> > >> 2012/1/3 Pavel Janík <Pa...@janik.cz>:
> > >> >> we would use (TM). At some
> point, say after we
> > >>
> > >> actually have a
> > >>
> > >> >> release, then we could ask Apache to
> pursue
> > >>
> > >> registration for "Apache
> > >>
> > >> >> OpenOffice"
> > >> >
> > >> > Why would we do so if we know that
> Sun/Oracle could
> > >>
> > >> not get it registered (and thus have chosen
> OpenOffice.org
> > >> instead)?
> > >>
> > >> We're talking about the full mark, "Apache
> > >> OpenOffice". I have no
> > >> reason to think this could not be
> registered.
> > >>
> > >> In any case, we already discussed this,
> voted, and the
> > >> choice was
> > >> "Apache OpenOffice". We're now talking
> about the
> > >> graphical ogo that
> > >> will reflect that name.
> > >>
> > >> > --
> > >> > Pavel Janík
>
Re: Moving ahead with the AOO logo and rebranding
Posted by Graham Lauder <g....@gmail.com>.
On Wednesday 04 Jan 2012 11:14:53 Rob Weir wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 4:52 PM, Pedro Giffuni <pf...@apache.org> wrote:
> > Hi Rob;
> >
> > JIC someone with a lot of spare time gives a try
> > on this logo thing ... I have some questions.
> >
> > What would be the implications (if any) of using
> > a legally licensed commercial font?
>
> Our ability to use such a logo would depend on the specific terms of
> the font license.
>
> But in general, a commercial font license might lead to restrictions
> on how we redistribute images using the font. For example, we might
> only be able to redistribute rasterized bitmaps of a logo, but not a
> scalable vector image that included a font glyph definition as well.
> A commercial font might also restrict who in the project is able to
> modify the logo or create derivative logos for the benefit of the
> project.
>
> I'm not sure any of these are killer objections to the use of a
> commercial font. But I think we'd want a strong design reason for not
> using a font with few or no restrictions.
+1, the old font was a commercial one: Frutiger, which caused all sorts of
issues when being used by the community Artists. There are plenty of similar
fonts about. The "best" solution was Liberation Sans at 60% IIRC. But that
was just to try and maintain the old logo look as close as possible.
My personal opinion is; if we can't bundle the font with the software then we
shouldn't use it. Of course, it should be added there is absolutely no
reason why a font should be used at all in the main logo. Taglines and
positioners perhaps and a free font should be used in things such as
splashscreens, but the logo can be a graphic that looks like text. I've added
a couple of proposals based on a graphic that was created in a vector editor,
no fonts used, created as needed.
To much focus on Text/Font style in branding is a part of an old paradigm.
This was put in a style guide so that signwriters could easily retain
corporate branding out on the high street. We don't do High street, we are
internet based. We just have to make our branding easily available to those
who want to distribute it.
That is is the power of the internet after all.
>
> > Ariel pointed to some nice splash screens done
> > previously in the Wiki, can those be (re)used
> > as a starting point?
>
> I have no objections. But I think right now we're talking about the
> general theme of the Drew's logo proposal, i.e., the distinctive
> design elements of:
>
> - text
> - color
Broader than this, we are talking pallet, aesthetics, emotive response.
> - type face
necessary, only if a designed font face is used as part of the graphic
> - spacing
> - background
> - embellishment.
> - and so on
>
> If there is consensus on that, then there will be follow up design
> work to incorporate that logo into a variety of locations, including a
> splash screen. But I think there is a hesitation to invest in that
> additional work until we're sure the basic design is OK.
Which of course is completely the wrong way round.
Define the look and feel first, the logo should fit that.
Answers first:
What is our target Market
What is our aesthetic,
how do we want the market to percieve us.
How do they percieve us now,
do we want to change that perception,
This is not about what the people on this list consider is aesthetically
pleasing to them, but what the people who are going to download the software,
think is best.
I would like to see a selection of branding elements, in particular: Pallet,
logo and name, several of each and then survey our "customers" via the
announce list to find their preferences. Any brand suggestions should include
all of the above including an explanation that defines the aesthetic and where
it positions the product in terms of the market as well as target market.
Voting on the list is a particularly bad and limiting way to make these sorts
of decisions, especially without any research whatsoever.
It has been itterated on a number of occasions that Apache is about building
communities, what better way to bring the community together than giving them
the opportunity to participate in a meaningful way and demonstrating to them
that the project actually cares about their opinions.
I've put together a prenotification to go out on the announce list to ask
people to participate in a survey and I'm putting together some questions for
the respondents to that mail to answer. This would be a good apportunity to
run this past a wider audience.
Cheers
GL
>
> -Rob
>
> > cheers,
> >
> > Pedro.
> >
> > --- Mar 3/1/12, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> ha scritto:
> > ...
> >
> >> 2012/1/3 Pavel Janík <Pa...@janik.cz>:
> >> >> we would use (TM). At some point, say after we
> >>
> >> actually have a
> >>
> >> >> release, then we could ask Apache to pursue
> >>
> >> registration for "Apache
> >>
> >> >> OpenOffice"
> >> >
> >> > Why would we do so if we know that Sun/Oracle could
> >>
> >> not get it registered (and thus have chosen OpenOffice.org
> >> instead)?
> >>
> >> We're talking about the full mark, "Apache
> >> OpenOffice". I have no
> >> reason to think this could not be registered.
> >>
> >> In any case, we already discussed this, voted, and the
> >> choice was
> >> "Apache OpenOffice". We're now talking about the
> >> graphical ogo that
> >> will reflect that name.
> >>
> >> > --
> >> > Pavel Janík
Re: Moving ahead with the AOO logo and rebranding
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 4:52 PM, Pedro Giffuni <pf...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hi Rob;
>
> JIC someone with a lot of spare time gives a try
> on this logo thing ... I have some questions.
>
> What would be the implications (if any) of using
> a legally licensed commercial font?
>
Our ability to use such a logo would depend on the specific terms of
the font license.
But in general, a commercial font license might lead to restrictions
on how we redistribute images using the font. For example, we might
only be able to redistribute rasterized bitmaps of a logo, but not a
scalable vector image that included a font glyph definition as well.
A commercial font might also restrict who in the project is able to
modify the logo or create derivative logos for the benefit of the
project.
I'm not sure any of these are killer objections to the use of a
commercial font. But I think we'd want a strong design reason for not
using a font with few or no restrictions.
> Ariel pointed to some nice splash screens done
> previously in the Wiki, can those be (re)used
> as a starting point?
>
I have no objections. But I think right now we're talking about the
general theme of the Drew's logo proposal, i.e., the distinctive
design elements of:
- text
- color
- type face
- spacing
- background
- embellishment.
- and so on
If there is consensus on that, then there will be follow up design
work to incorporate that logo into a variety of locations, including a
splash screen. But I think there is a hesitation to invest in that
additional work until we're sure the basic design is OK.
-Rob
> cheers,
>
> Pedro.
>
> --- Mar 3/1/12, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> ha scritto:
> ...
>> 2012/1/3 Pavel Janík <Pa...@janik.cz>:
>> >> we would use (TM). At some point, say after we
>> actually have a
>> >> release, then we could ask Apache to pursue
>> registration for "Apache
>> >> OpenOffice"
>> >
>> > Why would we do so if we know that Sun/Oracle could
>> not get it registered (and thus have chosen OpenOffice.org
>> instead)?
>>
>> We're talking about the full mark, "Apache
>> OpenOffice". I have no
>> reason to think this could not be registered.
>>
>> In any case, we already discussed this, voted, and the
>> choice was
>> "Apache OpenOffice". We're now talking about the
>> graphical ogo that
>> will reflect that name.
>>
>> > --
>> > Pavel Janík
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
Re: Moving ahead with the AOO logo and rebranding
Posted by Pedro Giffuni <pf...@apache.org>.
Hi Rob;
JIC someone with a lot of spare time gives a try
on this logo thing ... I have some questions.
What would be the implications (if any) of using
a legally licensed commercial font?
Ariel pointed to some nice splash screens done
previously in the Wiki, can those be (re)used
as a starting point?
cheers,
Pedro.
--- Mar 3/1/12, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> ha scritto:
...
> 2012/1/3 Pavel Janík <Pa...@janik.cz>:
> >> we would use (TM). At some point, say after we
> actually have a
> >> release, then we could ask Apache to pursue
> registration for "Apache
> >> OpenOffice"
> >
> > Why would we do so if we know that Sun/Oracle could
> not get it registered (and thus have chosen OpenOffice.org
> instead)?
>
> We're talking about the full mark, "Apache
> OpenOffice". I have no
> reason to think this could not be registered.
>
> In any case, we already discussed this, voted, and the
> choice was
> "Apache OpenOffice". We're now talking about the
> graphical ogo that
> will reflect that name.
>
> > --
> > Pavel Janík
> >
> >
> >
>
Re: Moving ahead with the AOO logo and rebranding
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
2012/1/3 Pavel Janík <Pa...@janik.cz>:
>> we would use (TM). At some point, say after we actually have a
>> release, then we could ask Apache to pursue registration for "Apache
>> OpenOffice"
>
> Why would we do so if we know that Sun/Oracle could not get it registered (and thus have chosen OpenOffice.org instead)?
We're talking about the full mark, "Apache OpenOffice". I have no
reason to think this could not be registered.
In any case, we already discussed this, voted, and the choice was
"Apache OpenOffice". We're now talking about the graphical ogo that
will reflect that name.
> --
> Pavel Janík
>
>
>
Re: Moving ahead with the AOO logo and rebranding
Posted by Pavel Janík <Pa...@Janik.cz>.
> we would use (TM). At some point, say after we actually have a
> release, then we could ask Apache to pursue registration for "Apache
> OpenOffice"
Why would we do so if we know that Sun/Oracle could not get it registered (and thus have chosen OpenOffice.org instead)?
--
Pavel Janík
Re: Moving ahead with the AOO logo and rebranding
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
2012/1/3 Pavel Janík <Pa...@janik.cz>:
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOOLogo+proposal
>>
>> Personally I think this is fine work, and since we've received no
>> counter-proposals in the last month, we should go ahead and update the
>
> There is a TM in the image. Does Apache own the trademark OpenOffice or Apache OpenOffice? I don't think so.
(TM) indicates that we claim a trademark. (R) means it is a
registered trademark.
With "OpenOffice.org" we would use (R), but with "Apache OpenOffice"
we would use (TM). At some point, say after we actually have a
release, then we could ask Apache to pursue registration for "Apache
OpenOffice"
So in other words "TM" is asserting it as a trademark, even though it
has not yet been registered.
-Rob
> --
> Pavel Janík
>
>
>
Re: Moving ahead with the AOO logo and rebranding
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 8:41 PM, Graham Lauder <g....@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wednesday 04 Jan 2012 13:18:51 Rob Weir wrote:
>> On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 8:02 PM, Graham Lauder <g....@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > On Wednesday 04 Jan 2012 11:13:20 Ross Gardler wrote:
>> >> Sent from my mobile device, please forgive errors and brevity.
>> >>
>> >> On Jan 3, 2012 8:59 PM, "Pavel Janík" <Pa...@janik.cz> wrote:
>> >> > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOOLogo+proposa
>> >> > > l
>> >> > >
>> >> > > Personally I think this is fine work, and since we've received no
>> >> > > counter-proposals in the last month, we should go ahead and
>> >> > > update the
>> >> >
>> >> > There is a TM in the image. Does Apache own the trademark
>> >> > OpenOffice or Apache OpenOffice?
>> >>
>> >> Yes, in both cases.
>> >>
>> >> Ross
>> >
>> > Sorry to be a pedant, are you saying that we own OpenOffice as well as
>> > OpenOffice.org
>>
>> The question Ross responded to was on "Apache OpenOffice", not
>> "OpenOffice".
>>
>> Hope that helps.
>>
>> -Rob
>
> Sorry, the question specified two trade marks, neither of which was
> OpenOffice.org. Now we know we have the OpenOffice.org gifted from Oracle,
> but OpenOffice is a different brand all together. I just wanted to clarify,
> do we now own OpenOffice (which we never have in the past) or when Ross said
> "Yes to both." did he just accidentally lose sight of the lack of .org in
> Pavels question
>
Ah. I see. He didn't ask the question I thought he did. Sorry.
It is a tough question to answer since talking about "owning" a
trademark is already starting the discussion in a state of sin.
A trademark is a right, a right basically to be free of unfair
competition from others confusing your customers, or passing off their
goods as being endorsed by you. The name we've chosen is "Apache
OpenOffice". That is what we claim as the trademarked name, and which
hopefully we'll register at some point.
Claiming that as a trademark, and using it in public, gives us rights
not only to that name, but also prevents others from using names that
have a likelihood of confusion with that name. IMHO, and IANAL, if
someone used the term "OpenOffice" to refer to desktop productivity
application software they would be infringing on this trademark. This
does not mean we "own" "OpenOffice" but that we own a minimal
"confusion-free zone" around "Apache OpenOffice" and "OpenOffice.org"
used in conjunction with software of this variety (office suites) and
that any 3rd party use of "OpenOffice" is likely to confuse our users.
Does that make sense?
-Rob
> Cheers
> GL
>
>>
>> > Cheers
>> > GL
Re: Moving ahead with the AOO logo and rebranding
Posted by Pedro Giffuni <pf...@apache.org>.
--- Mar 3/1/12, Graham Lauder <g....@gmail.com> ha scritto:
...
>
> Sorry, the question specified two trade marks, neither of
> which was
> OpenOffice.org. Now we know we have the
> OpenOffice.org gifted from Oracle,
> but OpenOffice is a different brand all together. I
> just wanted to clarify,
> do we now own OpenOffice (which we never have in the past)
> or when Ross said
> "Yes to both." did he just accidentally lose sight of the
> lack of .org in Pavels question
>
My understanding is that along with OpenOffice.org,
SUN/Oracle did register OpenOffice in some places and those
trademarks were transferred to the ASF too.
cheers,
Pedro.
Re: Moving ahead with the AOO logo and rebranding
Posted by Graham Lauder <g....@gmail.com>.
On Wednesday 04 Jan 2012 13:18:51 Rob Weir wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 8:02 PM, Graham Lauder <g....@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Wednesday 04 Jan 2012 11:13:20 Ross Gardler wrote:
> >> Sent from my mobile device, please forgive errors and brevity.
> >>
> >> On Jan 3, 2012 8:59 PM, "Pavel Janík" <Pa...@janik.cz> wrote:
> >> > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOOLogo+proposa
> >> > > l
> >> > >
> >> > > Personally I think this is fine work, and since we've received no
> >> > > counter-proposals in the last month, we should go ahead and
> >> > > update the
> >> >
> >> > There is a TM in the image. Does Apache own the trademark
> >> > OpenOffice or Apache OpenOffice?
> >>
> >> Yes, in both cases.
> >>
> >> Ross
> >
> > Sorry to be a pedant, are you saying that we own OpenOffice as well as
> > OpenOffice.org
>
> The question Ross responded to was on "Apache OpenOffice", not
> "OpenOffice".
>
> Hope that helps.
>
> -Rob
Sorry, the question specified two trade marks, neither of which was
OpenOffice.org. Now we know we have the OpenOffice.org gifted from Oracle,
but OpenOffice is a different brand all together. I just wanted to clarify,
do we now own OpenOffice (which we never have in the past) or when Ross said
"Yes to both." did he just accidentally lose sight of the lack of .org in
Pavels question
Cheers
GL
>
> > Cheers
> > GL
Re: Moving ahead with the AOO logo and rebranding
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 8:02 PM, Graham Lauder <g....@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wednesday 04 Jan 2012 11:13:20 Ross Gardler wrote:
>> Sent from my mobile device, please forgive errors and brevity.
>>
>> On Jan 3, 2012 8:59 PM, "Pavel Janík" <Pa...@janik.cz> wrote:
>> > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOOLogo+proposal
>> > >
>> > > Personally I think this is fine work, and since we've received no
>> > > counter-proposals in the last month, we should go ahead and
>> > > update the
>> >
>> > There is a TM in the image. Does Apache own the trademark
>> > OpenOffice or Apache OpenOffice?
>>
>> Yes, in both cases.
>>
>> Ross
>
> Sorry to be a pedant, are you saying that we own OpenOffice as well as
> OpenOffice.org
>
The question Ross responded to was on "Apache OpenOffice", not "OpenOffice".
Hope that helps.
-Rob
> Cheers
> GL
Re: Moving ahead with the AOO logo and rebranding
Posted by Graham Lauder <g....@gmail.com>.
On Wednesday 04 Jan 2012 11:13:20 Ross Gardler wrote:
> Sent from my mobile device, please forgive errors and brevity.
>
> On Jan 3, 2012 8:59 PM, "Pavel Janík" <Pa...@janik.cz> wrote:
> > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOOLogo+proposal
> > >
> > > Personally I think this is fine work, and since we've received no
> > > counter-proposals in the last month, we should go ahead and
> > > update the
> >
> > There is a TM in the image. Does Apache own the trademark
> > OpenOffice or Apache OpenOffice?
>
> Yes, in both cases.
>
> Ross
Sorry to be a pedant, are you saying that we own OpenOffice as well as
OpenOffice.org
Cheers
GL
Re: Moving ahead with the AOO logo and rebranding
Posted by Ross Gardler <rg...@opendirective.com>.
Sent from my mobile device, please forgive errors and brevity.
On Jan 3, 2012 8:59 PM, "Pavel Janík" <Pa...@janik.cz> wrote:
>
> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOOLogo+proposal
> >
> > Personally I think this is fine work, and since we've received no
> > counter-proposals in the last month, we should go ahead and
> > update the
>
> There is a TM in the image. Does Apache own the trademark
> OpenOffice or Apache OpenOffice?
Yes, in both cases.
Ross
Re: Moving ahead with the AOO logo and rebranding
Posted by Pavel Janík <Pa...@Janik.cz>.
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOOLogo+proposal
>
> Personally I think this is fine work, and since we've received no
> counter-proposals in the last month, we should go ahead and update the
There is a TM in the image. Does Apache own the trademark OpenOffice or Apache OpenOffice? I don't think so.
--
Pavel Janík
Re: Moving ahead with the AOO logo and rebranding
Posted by drew <dr...@baseanswers.com>.
On Wed, 2012-01-04 at 17:49 +0100, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
> On 1/4/12 5:18 PM, Dave Fisher wrote:
> >
> > On Jan 4, 2012, at 7:34 AM, drew wrote:
> >
> >> On Wed, 2012-01-04 at 11:10 +0100, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
> >>> On 1/3/12 11:08 PM, Kay Schenk wrote:
> >>>> On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 11:15 AM, Rob Weir<ro...@apache.org> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> A month ago Drew sent a logo proposal to the ooo-marketing list. It
> >>>>> has been discussed and iterated on that list. The current state of
> >>>>> the proposal is on the wiki:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOOLogo+proposal
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Personally I think this is fine work, and since we've received no
> >>>>> counter-proposals in the last month, we should go ahead and update the
> >>>>> splash screen and website with the new logo. That's my opinion.
> >>>>> However, others have suggested we take a RTC approach to this. So be
> >>>>> it.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Please review the logo proposal on the above wiki page. If you have a
> >>>>> counter proposal now, or if you intend to make a counter-proposal but
> >>>>> need more time, then please speak up. But if there are no other
> >>>>> proposals, then we have lazy consensus.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Considering that some project members may still be on vacation, I'd
> >>>>> like to leave this open for another full week.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> -Rob
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> These are wonderful! I'm not subscribed to the marketing list so I hadn't
> >>>> seen the full suite until just now.
> >>>>
> >>>> For the install graphic, I would prefer :
> >>>>
> >>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/download/attachments/27832565/Image_aooi.bmp?version=1&modificationDate=1324462312000
> >>>
> >>> i would prefer this one, but i am not sure about the URL. Shouldn't it
> >>> be www.openoffice.org as the main entry point from the perspective of a
> >>> user who simply install it wherever it comes from (download, magazine
> >>> CD, promotion USB stick, ...)
> >>>
> >>> @Drew, can you help to prepare one for the SDK as well?
> >>
> >> Howdy,
> >>
> >> yes I can do that - Ok, reading the thread then I will go ahead starting
> >> today and finish, I guess two sets of graphics
> >> One set of final logo art for both web and print.
> >> One set of art for the code, based on the design, such as the image
> >> referenced above.
> >>
> >> I have time to do this straight through, so I can't see taking more then
> >> this week.
> >>
> >> There are a number of references in the earlier thread to images in the
> >> code base, maybe covering everything needed I will look at those and put
> >> up a proposed replacement, for each, to the wiki page as produced, folks
> >> can give a quick review and afterwards I'd check them into svn - sound
> >> right?
> >
> > While you are at it please have a look at http://www.openoffice.org/product/index.html
>
> wow, a perfect example where a complete rework would be very useful for
> the overall user experience.
>
> As a first step i think we can skip the image map and can point to the
> next product page where of course are also some changes necessary to
> remove or replace the application icons.
I would agree with this - seems that product.html should be index.html
and just eliminate one superfluous page view and click.
//drew
Re: Moving ahead with the AOO logo and rebranding
Posted by Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@googlemail.com>.
On 1/4/12 5:18 PM, Dave Fisher wrote:
>
> On Jan 4, 2012, at 7:34 AM, drew wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 2012-01-04 at 11:10 +0100, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
>>> On 1/3/12 11:08 PM, Kay Schenk wrote:
>>>> On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 11:15 AM, Rob Weir<ro...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> A month ago Drew sent a logo proposal to the ooo-marketing list. It
>>>>> has been discussed and iterated on that list. The current state of
>>>>> the proposal is on the wiki:
>>>>>
>>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOOLogo+proposal
>>>>>
>>>>> Personally I think this is fine work, and since we've received no
>>>>> counter-proposals in the last month, we should go ahead and update the
>>>>> splash screen and website with the new logo. That's my opinion.
>>>>> However, others have suggested we take a RTC approach to this. So be
>>>>> it.
>>>>>
>>>>> Please review the logo proposal on the above wiki page. If you have a
>>>>> counter proposal now, or if you intend to make a counter-proposal but
>>>>> need more time, then please speak up. But if there are no other
>>>>> proposals, then we have lazy consensus.
>>>>>
>>>>> Considering that some project members may still be on vacation, I'd
>>>>> like to leave this open for another full week.
>>>>>
>>>>> -Rob
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> These are wonderful! I'm not subscribed to the marketing list so I hadn't
>>>> seen the full suite until just now.
>>>>
>>>> For the install graphic, I would prefer :
>>>>
>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/download/attachments/27832565/Image_aooi.bmp?version=1&modificationDate=1324462312000
>>>
>>> i would prefer this one, but i am not sure about the URL. Shouldn't it
>>> be www.openoffice.org as the main entry point from the perspective of a
>>> user who simply install it wherever it comes from (download, magazine
>>> CD, promotion USB stick, ...)
>>>
>>> @Drew, can you help to prepare one for the SDK as well?
>>
>> Howdy,
>>
>> yes I can do that - Ok, reading the thread then I will go ahead starting
>> today and finish, I guess two sets of graphics
>> One set of final logo art for both web and print.
>> One set of art for the code, based on the design, such as the image
>> referenced above.
>>
>> I have time to do this straight through, so I can't see taking more then
>> this week.
>>
>> There are a number of references in the earlier thread to images in the
>> code base, maybe covering everything needed I will look at those and put
>> up a proposed replacement, for each, to the wiki page as produced, folks
>> can give a quick review and afterwards I'd check them into svn - sound
>> right?
>
> While you are at it please have a look at http://www.openoffice.org/product/index.html
wow, a perfect example where a complete rework would be very useful for
the overall user experience.
As a first step i think we can skip the image map and can point to the
next product page where of course are also some changes necessary to
remove or replace the application icons.
Juergen
>
> Thanks,
> Dave
>
>
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> //drew
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Juergen
>>>
>>>>
>>>> -- or --
>>>>
>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/download/attachments/27832565/Image_aooi_wht.bmp?version=1&modificationDate=1325048664000
>>>>
>>>> since we're going for a rebranding...
>>>>
>>>> Great work by Drew (and perhaps others!)
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
Re: Moving ahead with the AOO logo and rebranding
Posted by Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net>.
On Jan 4, 2012, at 7:34 AM, drew wrote:
> On Wed, 2012-01-04 at 11:10 +0100, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
>> On 1/3/12 11:08 PM, Kay Schenk wrote:
>>> On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 11:15 AM, Rob Weir<ro...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> A month ago Drew sent a logo proposal to the ooo-marketing list. It
>>>> has been discussed and iterated on that list. The current state of
>>>> the proposal is on the wiki:
>>>>
>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOOLogo+proposal
>>>>
>>>> Personally I think this is fine work, and since we've received no
>>>> counter-proposals in the last month, we should go ahead and update the
>>>> splash screen and website with the new logo. That's my opinion.
>>>> However, others have suggested we take a RTC approach to this. So be
>>>> it.
>>>>
>>>> Please review the logo proposal on the above wiki page. If you have a
>>>> counter proposal now, or if you intend to make a counter-proposal but
>>>> need more time, then please speak up. But if there are no other
>>>> proposals, then we have lazy consensus.
>>>>
>>>> Considering that some project members may still be on vacation, I'd
>>>> like to leave this open for another full week.
>>>>
>>>> -Rob
>>>>
>>>
>>> These are wonderful! I'm not subscribed to the marketing list so I hadn't
>>> seen the full suite until just now.
>>>
>>> For the install graphic, I would prefer :
>>>
>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/download/attachments/27832565/Image_aooi.bmp?version=1&modificationDate=1324462312000
>>
>> i would prefer this one, but i am not sure about the URL. Shouldn't it
>> be www.openoffice.org as the main entry point from the perspective of a
>> user who simply install it wherever it comes from (download, magazine
>> CD, promotion USB stick, ...)
>>
>> @Drew, can you help to prepare one for the SDK as well?
>
> Howdy,
>
> yes I can do that - Ok, reading the thread then I will go ahead starting
> today and finish, I guess two sets of graphics
> One set of final logo art for both web and print.
> One set of art for the code, based on the design, such as the image
> referenced above.
>
> I have time to do this straight through, so I can't see taking more then
> this week.
>
> There are a number of references in the earlier thread to images in the
> code base, maybe covering everything needed I will look at those and put
> up a proposed replacement, for each, to the wiki page as produced, folks
> can give a quick review and afterwards I'd check them into svn - sound
> right?
While you are at it please have a look at http://www.openoffice.org/product/index.html
Thanks,
Dave
>
> Thanks,
>
> //drew
>
>
>>
>> Juergen
>>
>>>
>>> -- or --
>>>
>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/download/attachments/27832565/Image_aooi_wht.bmp?version=1&modificationDate=1325048664000
>>>
>>> since we're going for a rebranding...
>>>
>>> Great work by Drew (and perhaps others!)
>>
>>
>
>
Re: Moving ahead with the AOO logo and rebranding
Posted by drew <dr...@baseanswers.com>.
On Wed, 2012-01-04 at 11:10 +0100, Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
> On 1/3/12 11:08 PM, Kay Schenk wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 11:15 AM, Rob Weir<ro...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> >> A month ago Drew sent a logo proposal to the ooo-marketing list. It
> >> has been discussed and iterated on that list. The current state of
> >> the proposal is on the wiki:
> >>
> >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOOLogo+proposal
> >>
> >> Personally I think this is fine work, and since we've received no
> >> counter-proposals in the last month, we should go ahead and update the
> >> splash screen and website with the new logo. That's my opinion.
> >> However, others have suggested we take a RTC approach to this. So be
> >> it.
> >>
> >> Please review the logo proposal on the above wiki page. If you have a
> >> counter proposal now, or if you intend to make a counter-proposal but
> >> need more time, then please speak up. But if there are no other
> >> proposals, then we have lazy consensus.
> >>
> >> Considering that some project members may still be on vacation, I'd
> >> like to leave this open for another full week.
> >>
> >> -Rob
> >>
> >
> > These are wonderful! I'm not subscribed to the marketing list so I hadn't
> > seen the full suite until just now.
> >
> > For the install graphic, I would prefer :
> >
> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/download/attachments/27832565/Image_aooi.bmp?version=1&modificationDate=1324462312000
>
> i would prefer this one, but i am not sure about the URL. Shouldn't it
> be www.openoffice.org as the main entry point from the perspective of a
> user who simply install it wherever it comes from (download, magazine
> CD, promotion USB stick, ...)
>
> @Drew, can you help to prepare one for the SDK as well?
Howdy,
yes I can do that - Ok, reading the thread then I will go ahead starting
today and finish, I guess two sets of graphics
One set of final logo art for both web and print.
One set of art for the code, based on the design, such as the image
referenced above.
I have time to do this straight through, so I can't see taking more then
this week.
There are a number of references in the earlier thread to images in the
code base, maybe covering everything needed I will look at those and put
up a proposed replacement, for each, to the wiki page as produced, folks
can give a quick review and afterwards I'd check them into svn - sound
right?
Thanks,
//drew
>
> Juergen
>
> >
> > -- or --
> >
> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/download/attachments/27832565/Image_aooi_wht.bmp?version=1&modificationDate=1325048664000
> >
> > since we're going for a rebranding...
> >
> > Great work by Drew (and perhaps others!)
>
>
Re: Moving ahead with the AOO logo and rebranding
Posted by Jürgen Schmidt <jo...@googlemail.com>.
On 1/3/12 11:08 PM, Kay Schenk wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 11:15 AM, Rob Weir<ro...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> A month ago Drew sent a logo proposal to the ooo-marketing list. It
>> has been discussed and iterated on that list. The current state of
>> the proposal is on the wiki:
>>
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOOLogo+proposal
>>
>> Personally I think this is fine work, and since we've received no
>> counter-proposals in the last month, we should go ahead and update the
>> splash screen and website with the new logo. That's my opinion.
>> However, others have suggested we take a RTC approach to this. So be
>> it.
>>
>> Please review the logo proposal on the above wiki page. If you have a
>> counter proposal now, or if you intend to make a counter-proposal but
>> need more time, then please speak up. But if there are no other
>> proposals, then we have lazy consensus.
>>
>> Considering that some project members may still be on vacation, I'd
>> like to leave this open for another full week.
>>
>> -Rob
>>
>
> These are wonderful! I'm not subscribed to the marketing list so I hadn't
> seen the full suite until just now.
>
> For the install graphic, I would prefer :
>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/download/attachments/27832565/Image_aooi.bmp?version=1&modificationDate=1324462312000
i would prefer this one, but i am not sure about the URL. Shouldn't it
be www.openoffice.org as the main entry point from the perspective of a
user who simply install it wherever it comes from (download, magazine
CD, promotion USB stick, ...)
@Drew, can you help to prepare one for the SDK as well?
Juergen
>
> -- or --
>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/download/attachments/27832565/Image_aooi_wht.bmp?version=1&modificationDate=1325048664000
>
> since we're going for a rebranding...
>
> Great work by Drew (and perhaps others!)
Re: Moving ahead with the AOO logo and rebranding
Posted by Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com>.
On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 11:15 AM, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
> A month ago Drew sent a logo proposal to the ooo-marketing list. It
> has been discussed and iterated on that list. The current state of
> the proposal is on the wiki:
>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOOLogo+proposal
>
> Personally I think this is fine work, and since we've received no
> counter-proposals in the last month, we should go ahead and update the
> splash screen and website with the new logo. That's my opinion.
> However, others have suggested we take a RTC approach to this. So be
> it.
>
> Please review the logo proposal on the above wiki page. If you have a
> counter proposal now, or if you intend to make a counter-proposal but
> need more time, then please speak up. But if there are no other
> proposals, then we have lazy consensus.
>
> Considering that some project members may still be on vacation, I'd
> like to leave this open for another full week.
>
> -Rob
>
These are wonderful! I'm not subscribed to the marketing list so I hadn't
seen the full suite until just now.
For the install graphic, I would prefer :
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/download/attachments/27832565/Image_aooi.bmp?version=1&modificationDate=1324462312000
-- or --
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/download/attachments/27832565/Image_aooi_wht.bmp?version=1&modificationDate=1325048664000
since we're going for a rebranding...
Great work by Drew (and perhaps others!)
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MzK
"You will always be lucky if you know how to make friends
with strange cats."
-- *Colonial American
proverb*
Re: Moving ahead with the AOO logo and rebranding
Posted by Andrea Pescetti <pe...@apache.org>.
Rob Weir wrote:
> A month ago Drew sent a logo proposal to the ooo-marketing list. It
> has been discussed and iterated on that list. The current state of
> the proposal is on the wiki:
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOOLogo+proposal
> Personally I think this is fine work
As I wrote on the marketing list, I find it very good too: it is a
variation on the existing OpenOffice.org logo perfect for an incremental
release such as 3.4. If the project, later on, decides for a major
rebranding, the time for it will be Apache OpenOffice 4.x.
Regards,
Andrea.
Re: Moving ahead with the AOO logo and rebranding
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Fri, Jan 6, 2012 at 9:12 PM, drew <dr...@baseanswers.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 2012-01-06 at 13:58 -0500, Rob Weir wrote:
>> On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 2:15 PM, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
>> > A month ago Drew sent a logo proposal to the ooo-marketing list. It
>> > has been discussed and iterated on that list. The current state of
>> > the proposal is on the wiki:
>> >
>> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOOLogo+proposal
>> >
>> > Personally I think this is fine work, and since we've received no
>> > counter-proposals in the last month, we should go ahead and update the
>> > splash screen and website with the new logo. That's my opinion.
>> > However, others have suggested we take a RTC approach to this. So be
>> > it.
>> >
>> > Please review the logo proposal on the above wiki page. If you have a
>> > counter proposal now, or if you intend to make a counter-proposal but
>> > need more time, then please speak up. But if there are no other
>> > proposals, then we have lazy consensus.
>> >
>>
>> We now have more than one logo proposal. So I'll withdraw my proposal
>> to move forward with Drew's logo (the only one we had at the time).
>>
>> Would it be worth at this point, having a public call for proposals on
>> the logo? Maybe advertise with a blog post? Give a month or two to
>> collect responses, then we vote?
>
> Howdy Rob,
>
> Well, my last email to you I think was the one saying I thought the logo
> change on the website should hold of till a Developer Snapshot build had
> the same graphic change..so of course I agree, it would not hurt to try
> and gather further proposals.
>
> Ok - how long? Let me flip it around, how long do you think before there
> would be a binary download available from the developer snapshot link on
> the website? How much run up time do you want for the graphics files for
> that build? (that can pretty darn slim, can't it)
>
I assume you mean this page:
http://www.openoffice.org/download/next/
It is something we need to discuss. That website, as we've discussed
before, is intended to be user facing, as compared to the podling site
which is more project/PPMC facing. We need to be careful about
putting code out on the user-facing site before we've actually have an
IPMC release. We need to avoid making it look like a release by
another name. Maybe instead we only advertise dev snapshots on the
podling page? And keep it very low key.
In any case, I think we are very close to having regular dev-provided
snapshots builds. (We have irregular builds already) But I'm not sure
how much longer before we have regular automated builds on all
platforms.
But I look at it more like this -- now that we're past the holidays,
how long would it take a volunteer, with a busy life outside of
Apache, to put together a logo proposal if they had an interest in
doing so? It seems to me that 2-3 weeks is sufficient.
> From that last question I'd gauge the answer for how long to wait for
> proposals.
>
> Best wishes,
>
> //drew
>>
>> If we did that, we'd probably want to start with some logo
>> requirements first, things like:
>>
>> -- Must say Apache OpenOffice (TM)
>> -- Must include "incubating"
>> -- Must be in SVG format
>> -- Must be readable in both color and monochrome
>> -- Must be available in the following sizes
>> -- Must use freely available fonts
>>
>> (Those are examples only. We might drop, modify or add similar
>> requirements. The point is we probably want to encourage proposals to
>> conform to a set of branding and technical requirements)
>>
>>
>> -Rob
>>
>> > Considering that some project members may still be on vacation, I'd
>> > like to leave this open for another full week.
>> >
>> > -Rob
>>
>
>
Re: Moving ahead with the AOO logo and rebranding
Posted by drew <dr...@baseanswers.com>.
On Fri, 2012-01-06 at 13:58 -0500, Rob Weir wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 2:15 PM, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
> > A month ago Drew sent a logo proposal to the ooo-marketing list. It
> > has been discussed and iterated on that list. The current state of
> > the proposal is on the wiki:
> >
> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOOLogo+proposal
> >
> > Personally I think this is fine work, and since we've received no
> > counter-proposals in the last month, we should go ahead and update the
> > splash screen and website with the new logo. That's my opinion.
> > However, others have suggested we take a RTC approach to this. So be
> > it.
> >
> > Please review the logo proposal on the above wiki page. If you have a
> > counter proposal now, or if you intend to make a counter-proposal but
> > need more time, then please speak up. But if there are no other
> > proposals, then we have lazy consensus.
> >
>
> We now have more than one logo proposal. So I'll withdraw my proposal
> to move forward with Drew's logo (the only one we had at the time).
>
> Would it be worth at this point, having a public call for proposals on
> the logo? Maybe advertise with a blog post? Give a month or two to
> collect responses, then we vote?
Howdy Rob,
Well, my last email to you I think was the one saying I thought the logo
change on the website should hold of till a Developer Snapshot build had
the same graphic change..so of course I agree, it would not hurt to try
and gather further proposals.
Ok - how long? Let me flip it around, how long do you think before there
would be a binary download available from the developer snapshot link on
the website? How much run up time do you want for the graphics files for
that build? (that can pretty darn slim, can't it)
>From that last question I'd gauge the answer for how long to wait for
proposals.
Best wishes,
//drew
>
> If we did that, we'd probably want to start with some logo
> requirements first, things like:
>
> -- Must say Apache OpenOffice (TM)
> -- Must include "incubating"
> -- Must be in SVG format
> -- Must be readable in both color and monochrome
> -- Must be available in the following sizes
> -- Must use freely available fonts
>
> (Those are examples only. We might drop, modify or add similar
> requirements. The point is we probably want to encourage proposals to
> conform to a set of branding and technical requirements)
>
>
> -Rob
>
> > Considering that some project members may still be on vacation, I'd
> > like to leave this open for another full week.
> >
> > -Rob
>
Re: Moving ahead with the AOO logo and rebranding
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Fri, Jan 6, 2012 at 3:40 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton
<de...@acm.org> wrote:
> 1. I think there should be agreement on the design and not the fine technicalities (is the font and its license, is there one or more SVG masters, what are the crafted bitmap renderings, etc.).
>
> 2. It should also be clear what situations a particular image is intended to be employed in to accomplish branding.
>
We'll eventually have a full branding "package". This would be a set
of images, in SVG, but also rasterized, in a variety of variations,
formats, sizes and aspect ratios, suitable for a variety of uses.
Some might be specialized for splash screen, others for "powered by"
use, etc. The full package would also have guidance on how the logos
should be used.
We don't want to require a full package be submitted initially. That
would not be reasonable. But we could certainly scope out what a
package might look like, and ask for 1 or 2 specific representative
logos (in whatever format) with the understanding that if the logo is
accepted, we'll need to work on generating the full package
eventually. For the full package the technicalities will be
important. But not so much for the initial review.
> I would like to narrow this to the case that Drew's two image sizes (plus the SVG master) was directed toward, not any of the other cases (splash screens, icons, etc.).
>
> Now along comes discussion about "incubating" and how/where/whether it appears, as well as two additional images. There is also some more-technical consideration with regard to the rendering of the bitmaps at different scales, but that is very much second-order.
>
> My recommendation is that all of this be consolidated on one wiki page that is specifically about the case that Drew was covering and where the considerations can be identified as well, but the scope be kept small.
>
> This is so (1) it is known exactly what the scope of deliberation is and (2) the constraints that are accepted as requirements for elements of the design can be captured and not have to be recreated by deep mining into earlier discussions.
>
> - Dennis
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rob Weir [mailto:robweir@apache.org]
> Sent: Friday, January 06, 2012 10:58
> To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Moving ahead with the AOO logo and rebranding
>
> On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 2:15 PM, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
>> A month ago Drew sent a logo proposal to the ooo-marketing list. It
>> has been discussed and iterated on that list. The current state of
>> the proposal is on the wiki:
>>
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOOLogo+proposal
>>
>> Personally I think this is fine work, and since we've received no
>> counter-proposals in the last month, we should go ahead and update the
>> splash screen and website with the new logo. That's my opinion.
>> However, others have suggested we take a RTC approach to this. So be
>> it.
>>
>> Please review the logo proposal on the above wiki page. If you have a
>> counter proposal now, or if you intend to make a counter-proposal but
>> need more time, then please speak up. But if there are no other
>> proposals, then we have lazy consensus.
>>
>
> We now have more than one logo proposal. So I'll withdraw my proposal
> to move forward with Drew's logo (the only one we had at the time).
>
> Would it be worth at this point, having a public call for proposals on
> the logo? Maybe advertise with a blog post? Give a month or two to
> collect responses, then we vote?
>
> If we did that, we'd probably want to start with some logo
> requirements first, things like:
>
> -- Must say Apache OpenOffice (TM)
> -- Must include "incubating"
> -- Must be in SVG format
> -- Must be readable in both color and monochrome
> -- Must be available in the following sizes
> -- Must use freely available fonts
>
> (Those are examples only. We might drop, modify or add similar
> requirements. The point is we probably want to encourage proposals to
> conform to a set of branding and technical requirements)
>
>
> -Rob
>
>> Considering that some project members may still be on vacation, I'd
>> like to leave this open for another full week.
>>
>> -Rob
>
RE: Moving ahead with the AOO logo and rebranding
Posted by "Dennis E. Hamilton" <de...@acm.org>.
1. I think there should be agreement on the design and not the fine technicalities (is the font and its license, is there one or more SVG masters, what are the crafted bitmap renderings, etc.).
2. It should also be clear what situations a particular image is intended to be employed in to accomplish branding.
I would like to narrow this to the case that Drew's two image sizes (plus the SVG master) was directed toward, not any of the other cases (splash screens, icons, etc.).
Now along comes discussion about "incubating" and how/where/whether it appears, as well as two additional images. There is also some more-technical consideration with regard to the rendering of the bitmaps at different scales, but that is very much second-order.
My recommendation is that all of this be consolidated on one wiki page that is specifically about the case that Drew was covering and where the considerations can be identified as well, but the scope be kept small.
This is so (1) it is known exactly what the scope of deliberation is and (2) the constraints that are accepted as requirements for elements of the design can be captured and not have to be recreated by deep mining into earlier discussions.
- Dennis
-----Original Message-----
From: Rob Weir [mailto:robweir@apache.org]
Sent: Friday, January 06, 2012 10:58
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: Moving ahead with the AOO logo and rebranding
On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 2:15 PM, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
> A month ago Drew sent a logo proposal to the ooo-marketing list. It
> has been discussed and iterated on that list. The current state of
> the proposal is on the wiki:
>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOOLogo+proposal
>
> Personally I think this is fine work, and since we've received no
> counter-proposals in the last month, we should go ahead and update the
> splash screen and website with the new logo. That's my opinion.
> However, others have suggested we take a RTC approach to this. So be
> it.
>
> Please review the logo proposal on the above wiki page. If you have a
> counter proposal now, or if you intend to make a counter-proposal but
> need more time, then please speak up. But if there are no other
> proposals, then we have lazy consensus.
>
We now have more than one logo proposal. So I'll withdraw my proposal
to move forward with Drew's logo (the only one we had at the time).
Would it be worth at this point, having a public call for proposals on
the logo? Maybe advertise with a blog post? Give a month or two to
collect responses, then we vote?
If we did that, we'd probably want to start with some logo
requirements first, things like:
-- Must say Apache OpenOffice (TM)
-- Must include "incubating"
-- Must be in SVG format
-- Must be readable in both color and monochrome
-- Must be available in the following sizes
-- Must use freely available fonts
(Those are examples only. We might drop, modify or add similar
requirements. The point is we probably want to encourage proposals to
conform to a set of branding and technical requirements)
-Rob
> Considering that some project members may still be on vacation, I'd
> like to leave this open for another full week.
>
> -Rob
Re: Moving ahead with the AOO logo and rebranding
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 2:15 PM, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
> A month ago Drew sent a logo proposal to the ooo-marketing list. It
> has been discussed and iterated on that list. The current state of
> the proposal is on the wiki:
>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOOLogo+proposal
>
> Personally I think this is fine work, and since we've received no
> counter-proposals in the last month, we should go ahead and update the
> splash screen and website with the new logo. That's my opinion.
> However, others have suggested we take a RTC approach to this. So be
> it.
>
> Please review the logo proposal on the above wiki page. If you have a
> counter proposal now, or if you intend to make a counter-proposal but
> need more time, then please speak up. But if there are no other
> proposals, then we have lazy consensus.
>
We now have more than one logo proposal. So I'll withdraw my proposal
to move forward with Drew's logo (the only one we had at the time).
Would it be worth at this point, having a public call for proposals on
the logo? Maybe advertise with a blog post? Give a month or two to
collect responses, then we vote?
If we did that, we'd probably want to start with some logo
requirements first, things like:
-- Must say Apache OpenOffice (TM)
-- Must include "incubating"
-- Must be in SVG format
-- Must be readable in both color and monochrome
-- Must be available in the following sizes
-- Must use freely available fonts
(Those are examples only. We might drop, modify or add similar
requirements. The point is we probably want to encourage proposals to
conform to a set of branding and technical requirements)
-Rob
> Considering that some project members may still be on vacation, I'd
> like to leave this open for another full week.
>
> -Rob