Sebastian, I only referred the marketing/PR side of things; both Inge and part of me offer you support in that area. The desire I tried to express is: avoiding confusion among users or 3rdparties, plus wannabe journalists, by not multiplying extra *official public* flavors of Calligra in their minds unless it can be easily explained in a short sentence to a Joe user. This is important, and was also quickly pointed out in the first comment on your blog entry [http://blogs.kde.org/2013/03/24/coffice-calligra-android-available-now].
I am totally OK with codenames, by design internal, either using urban dictionary, coding prefixes (COffice) or anything else :) But I would pick some parity here too since in case of FOSS also developer's blogs are part of the public messages. Journalists keep using them to sometimes say much more than the original authors actually mean. See Phoronix in the Aaron/Mir case as an example. Codenames, if they even exist, are not the same as the publicly communicated names that shaping the public recognition. A good improvement is the proposal of Calligra Mini sub-brand. Regarding the part that you do not plan (and I am not surprised given how complex it is): the look. I hope that ultimately, Calligra on Android shall be compliant with how 'native' apps look on the OS. This also most likely applies to any other platform that offers anything like own UX guidelines. So your early (and hopefully often) releasing should be highly respected. I only mean that the effort should be have an 'Experimental' label attached in very visible place (Google calls it beta) so it is much safer for us. -- regards / pozdrawiam, Jaroslaw Staniek Kexi & Calligra & KDE | http://calligra.org/kexi | http://kde.org Qt Certified Specialist | http://qt-project.org http://www.linkedin.com/in/jstaniek _______________________________________________ calligra-devel mailing list calligra-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/calligra-devel
