Hi Shane
On 05/06/2011 14:53, Shane Curcuru wrote:
Sophie Gautier wrote:
[...]
I've got the BOPI for France if you're interested in.
Kind regards
Sophie
Yes, please. If anyone has direct links to specific registration numbers
and where they're held of either "OpenOffice.org" (which we're ta
I'll try to clarify that with the people involved with the project at that time.
Best,
Jomar
-Original Message-
From: Simon Phipps
Date: Sun, 5 Jun 2011 13:18:06
To:
Reply-To: general@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [italo.vign...@documentfoundation.org: Re: OpenOffice and th
I'm aware that Sun successfully challenged a problematic third party
registration in Brazil just as the acquisition was going through. It may be
worth early investigation in case the registration on Sun's behalf was not
then completed; OOo had serious issues in Brazil over many years because of
it.
Sophie Gautier wrote:
Hi all,
On 05/06/2011 10:06, Julien Vermillard wrote:
On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 6:11 AM, Shane Curcuru
wrote:
Louis Suarez-Potts wrote:
...snip...
* Apache Foundation owns the trademark to OOo?
...snip...
The ASF has a recorded Software Grant that includes the trademark
Hi Shane,
Op 5-6-2011 6:11, Shane Curcuru schreef:
Question: is anyone here aware of any registrations of
"OpenOffice.org" or the logo or other related marks in other countries
besides the US?
The name "Open Office" has been registered in the Benelux by the Dutch
company Open Office Automati
Hi all,
On 05/06/2011 10:06, Julien Vermillard wrote:
On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 6:11 AM, Shane Curcuru wrote:
Louis Suarez-Potts wrote:
...snip...
* Apache Foundation owns the trademark to OOo?
...snip...
The ASF has a recorded Software Grant that includes the trademark along with
a specific
On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 6:11 AM, Shane Curcuru wrote:
> Louis Suarez-Potts wrote:
> ...snip...
>>
>> * Apache Foundation owns the trademark to OOo?
>
> ...snip...
>
> The ASF has a recorded Software Grant that includes the trademark along with
> a specific list of source code files.
>
> I have not
Louis Suarez-Potts wrote:
...snip...
* Apache Foundation owns the trademark to OOo?
...snip...
The ASF has a recorded Software Grant that includes the trademark along
with a specific list of source code files.
I have not yet seen the specific grant of the trademark itself at the
ASF yet (i.
ntics).
- Dennis
-Original Message-
From: sa3r...@gmail.com [mailto:sa3r...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Sam Ruby
<http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-general/201106.mbox/%3cbanlktimh6aghcav1bdh1vncm7ateobh...@mail.gmail.com%3e>
Sent: Saturday, June 04, 2011 05:19
To: general@i
I think this is a diversion.
We all know the press will choose the single sentence that will create the most
traffic. It doesn't matter if this pro or anti foo, they just want traffic.
Let's just assume nobody intended any malice. The journalists want us to fight,
it makes for better stories.
On 4 Jun 2011, at 13:18, Sam Ruby wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 4, 2011 at 7:46 AM, Simon Phipps wrote:
>>
>> On 4 Jun 2011, at 12:38, Sam Ruby wrote:
>>
>>> On Sat, Jun 4, 2011 at 6:32 AM, Simon Phipps wrote:
On Jun 4, 2011 2:03 AM, "Sam Ruby" wrote:
> However I
> will state that in ca
On Sat, Jun 4, 2011 at 7:46 AM, Simon Phipps wrote:
>
> On 4 Jun 2011, at 12:38, Sam Ruby wrote:
>
>> On Sat, Jun 4, 2011 at 6:32 AM, Simon Phipps wrote:
>>> On Jun 4, 2011 2:03 AM, "Sam Ruby" wrote:
However I
will state that in cases where widespread use of the code is vital for
On 4 Jun 2011, at 12:38, Sam Ruby wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 4, 2011 at 6:32 AM, Simon Phipps wrote:
>> On Jun 4, 2011 2:03 AM, "Sam Ruby" wrote:
>>> However I
>>> will state that in cases where widespread use of the code is vital for
>>> advancing the cause of free software that the Apache License,
On Sat, Jun 4, 2011 at 6:32 AM, Simon Phipps wrote:
> On Jun 4, 2011 2:03 AM, "Sam Ruby" wrote:
>> However I
>> will state that in cases where widespread use of the code is vital for
>> advancing the cause of free software that the Apache License, Version
>> 2.0 is an appropriate choice:
>>
>> ht
On Jun 4, 2011 2:03 AM, "Sam Ruby" wrote:
> However I
> will state that in cases where widespread use of the code is vital for
> advancing the cause of free software that the Apache License, Version
> 2.0 is an appropriate choice:
>
> http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-recommendations.html
Have
On Fri, Jun 3, 2011 at 10:13 PM, Greg Stein wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 3, 2011 at 16:42, Kevin Lau wrote:
>> First time posting to this list and has been reading it for few days now.
>>
>> Permit my naive question, can both organizations (TDF and Apache) separate
>> from their own licensing dependencie
On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 6:39 AM, Florian Effenberger
wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I hope you don't mind if I jump in to the discussion. The views shared here
> are not any official TDF statement, but rather solely my own ones, acting as
> a volunteer who has been contributing to the OpenOffice.org project,
Nick Kew wrote (02-06-11 17:48)
Hypothetically if this donation had happened before the
OOO/ODF split, can I assume that you would you have regarded it
as a solution to the underlying problems and never have split?
Would have been a solution for part of the problems. Not all, as may be
clear
On Fri, Jun 3, 2011 at 16:42, Kevin Lau wrote:
> First time posting to this list and has been reading it for few days now.
>
> Permit my naive question, can both organizations (TDF and Apache) separate
> from their own licensing dependencies and establish an independent entity
> (or something that
First time posting to this list and has been reading it for few days now.
Permit my naive question, can both organizations (TDF and Apache) separate
from their own licensing dependencies and establish an independent entity
(or something that works) to develop some code that can benefit both
partie
On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 11:39 AM, Florian Effenberger
wrote:
> Hello,
Hi Florian
> I hope you don't mind if I jump in to the discussion. The views shared here
> are not any official TDF statement, but rather solely my own ones, acting as
> a volunteer who has been contributing to the OpenOffice.o
On 02/06/2011 13:40, Jan Holesovsky wrote:
Hi Ross,
On 2011-06-02 at 12:09 +0100, Ross Gardler wrote:
Instead I would like to
understand if this technical objective of breaking OOo code into
reusable libraries that the various forks can collaborate on, is part of
the TDF mission.
I am one of
On Thu, 02 Jun 2011 12:39:12 +0200
Florian Effenberger wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I hope you don't mind if I jump in to the discussion.
Great to see you do so! We (ASF) have a decision to make here,
and input from you (ODF and OOO folks) is exactly what we need.
However, I'm getting mixed signals he
Hi Simon,
On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 4:57 PM, Simon Brouwer wrote:
> I think that is exactly the problem for many in the OpenOffice.org
> community. We didn't know of anything going on between OpenOffice.org and
> the ASF until Oracle's press release. So we have hardly had the opportunity
> to get ac
Hi Jim,
Op 2-6-2011 16:42, Jim Jagielski schreef:
On Jun 2, 2011, at 9:21 AM, Simon Brouwer wrote:
I had already been so bold as to adding myself to the list, expressing my
support to the proposal. I was wondering though. In the OpenOffice.org project,
many community members contribute in oth
On Jun 2, 2011, at 10:07 AM, Michael Meeks wrote:
>
> Sure - there are lots of nice side effects of rationalisation and so
> on, it all sounds good. But unfortunately IBM's move here is not
> primarily focused on that - otherwise (surely) it would work with TDF -
> where it has been made c
On Jun 2, 2011, at 9:21 AM, Simon Brouwer wrote:
> I had already been so bold as to adding myself to the list, expressing my
> support to the proposal. I was wondering though. In the OpenOffice.org
> project, many community members contribute in other ways than committing
> code, for example by
Simon Brouwer wrote on Jun 2, 2011 6:21:30 am:
I had already been so bold as to adding myself to the list,
expressing my support to the proposal. I was wondering though. In the
OpenOffice.org project, many community members contribute in other
ways than committing code, for example by writing or
Hey Michael!
Thanks for the detailed response about your position, thoughts,
concerns, and philosophy. It helps greatly to understand where you're
coming from. Rather than debate you on your philosophy ;-) ... I'll
answer a few key points in your email below:
On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 10:07, Michael
On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 10:07, Simon Brouwer wrote:
> Op 2-6-2011 15:30, Greg Stein schreef:
>...
>> I would suggest adding a "Non-code Contributors" table into the
>> proposal and putting your name in there. We don't have precedent for
>> it, so may as well start with something. We can always wigg
Hi Ross,
On Thu, 2011-06-02 at 12:09 +0100, Ross Gardler wrote:
> However, I do have a binding vote here and therefore I have a
> couple of questions for you:
..
> Are the goals of the TDF the same as the goals of this proposal
> to the Apache Software Foundation.
I would say they are sim
Op 2-6-2011 15:30, Greg Stein schreef:
On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 09:21, Simon Brouwer wrote:
Op 2-6-2011 15:04, Greg Stein schreef:
...
If you would like to contribute here (possibly instead of, or in
addition, to your work at TDF), then yes! Please add yourself into the
proposal on the wiki.
I
On 02/06/2011 14:21, Simon Brouwer wrote:
Op 2-6-2011 15:04, Greg Stein schreef:
On Jun 2, 2011 4:32 AM, "Alexandro Colorado" wrote:
...
There is currently a bit rearagement movement toward figuring things
out in
TDF OOo previously to the OOo annoucement, which happened last month
on the
market
On 02/06/2011 14:12, Ian Lynch wrote:
On 2 June 2011 14:04, Greg Stein wrote:
Should we add ourselfs as commiters?
If you would like to contribute here (possibly instead of, or in
addition, to your work at TDF), then yes! Please add yourself into the
proposal on the wiki.
I'm not likely
On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 09:21, Simon Brouwer wrote:
> Op 2-6-2011 15:04, Greg Stein schreef:
>...
>> If you would like to contribute here (possibly instead of, or in
>> addition, to your work at TDF), then yes! Please add yourself into the
>> proposal on the wiki.
>
> I had already been so bold as
On Jun 2, 2011, at 9:21 AM, Simon Brouwer wrote:
>> proposal on the wiki.
> I had already been so bold as to adding myself to the list, expressing my
> support to the proposal. I was wondering though. In the
> OpenOffice.orgproject, many community members contribute in other ways than
> commit
Op 2-6-2011 15:04, Greg Stein schreef:
On Jun 2, 2011 4:32 AM, "Alexandro Colorado" wrote:
...
There is currently a bit rearagement movement toward figuring things out in
TDF OOo previously to the OOo annoucement, which happened last month on the
marketing list in OOo.
http://openoffice.org/pro
On 2 June 2011 14:04, Greg Stein wrote:
>
> > Should we add ourselfs as commiters?
>
> If you would like to contribute here (possibly instead of, or in
> addition, to your work at TDF), then yes! Please add yourself into the
> proposal on the wiki.
>
I'm not likely to commit code. I run an accre
On Jun 2, 2011 4:32 AM, "Alexandro Colorado" wrote:
>...
> There is currently a bit rearagement movement toward figuring things out in
> TDF OOo previously to the OOo annoucement, which happened last month on the
> marketing list in OOo.
> http://openoffice.org/projects/marketing/lists/dev/archive
Hi Ross,
On 2011-06-02 at 12:09 +0100, Ross Gardler wrote:
> Instead I would like to
> understand if this technical objective of breaking OOo code into
> reusable libraries that the various forks can collaborate on, is part of
> the TDF mission.
I am one of the LibreOffice developers. I am n
On 02/06/2011 11:39, Florian Effenberger wrote:
I hope you don't mind if I jump in to the discussion.
Thank you for doing so. Speaking as someone outside all the involved
communities I'm pleased to hear your voice. I'm not equipped to answer
your questions, I'll leave that to people who know
Hello,
I hope you don't mind if I jump in to the discussion. The views shared
here are not any official TDF statement, but rather solely my own ones,
acting as a volunteer who has been contributing to the OpenOffice.org
project, and now the LibreOffice project, since 2004, investing lots of
m
On Jun 1, 2011, at 10:58 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
> On 6/1/2011 8:41 PM, Louis Suarez-Potts wrote:
>>
>> My questions then are absolutely pragmatic and relate—hence the to post—to
>> issues not so far discussed:
>>
>> * Apache Foundation owns the trademark to OOo?
>> * We at OOo receive
On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 11:52 PM, Greg Stein wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 21:41, Louis Suarez-Potts
> wrote:
>>
>> * Apache Foundation owns the trademark to OOo?
>
> [snip] I'm sure our legal folks can get that
> cleared up, should OOo be accepted into the Incubator, as part of the
> regular i
On 6/1/2011 8:41 PM, Louis Suarez-Potts wrote:
>
> My questions then are absolutely pragmatic and relate—hence the to post—to
> issues not so far discussed:
>
> * Apache Foundation owns the trademark to OOo?
> * We at OOo receive lots of requests to use it for mostly good purposes. We
> grant t
gt; > Date: June 1, 2011 2:58:02 PM EDT
> > To: Jim Jagielski
> > Cc: Louis Suarez-Potts , Italo Vignoli <
> italo.vign...@documentfoundation.org>, Sam Ruby
> > Subject: Re: OpenOffice and the ASF
> > message-id:
> >
> > For me, yes, share. And
On 2011-06-02, at 01:02 , robert_w...@us.ibm.com wrote:
> Louis Suarez-Potts wrote on 06/01/2011 09:41:08
> PM:
>
>>
>> * Apache Foundation owns the trademark to OOo?
>> * We at OOo receive lots of requests to use it for mostly good
>> purposes. We grant these, with minimal fuss and have set
Louis Suarez-Potts wrote on 06/01/2011 09:41:08
PM:
>
> * Apache Foundation owns the trademark to OOo?
> * We at OOo receive lots of requests to use it for mostly good
> purposes. We grant these, with minimal fuss and have set up systems
> to do that more efficiently. With the change in trade
On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 21:41, Louis Suarez-Potts wrote:
>
> On 2011-06-01, at 20:18 , Ross Gardler wrote:
>
>> [cc'ing Italo and Louis hopefully they have joined the incubator list
>> already, but just in case]
>
> Thanks. I actually have already joined it.
> So, to the list: Wave of hand signify
o re TDF and LOo
>> - Forwarded message from Italo
>> Vignoli -
>>
>> Date: Wed, 01 Jun 2011 23:16:53 +0200
>> From: Italo Vignoli
>> Reply-To: italo.vign...@documentfoundation.org
>> To: Jim Jagielski
>> CC: Louis Suarez-Potts,
>>
.vign...@documentfoundation.org
To: Jim Jagielski
CC: Louis Suarez-Potts,
Sam Ruby
Subject: Re: OpenOffice and the ASF
...
I will also read carefully the proposal, and make my comments. I
understand that it might still be improved (correct me if I am wrong,
because I have had just
More info re TDF and LOo
- Forwarded message from Italo Vignoli
-
Date: Wed, 01 Jun 2011 23:16:53 +0200
From: Italo Vignoli
Reply-To: italo.vign...@documentfoundation.org
To: Jim Jagielski
CC: Louis Suarez-Potts ,
Sam Ruby
Subject: Re: OpenOffice and the ASF
On 6/1/11 8:35
FYI:
Begin forwarded message:
> From: Louis Suarez-Potts
> Date: June 1, 2011 2:58:02 PM EDT
> To: Jim Jagielski
> Cc: Louis Suarez-Potts , Italo Vignoli
> , Sam Ruby
> Subject: Re: OpenOffice and the ASF
> message-id:
>
> For me, yes, share. And I quite ag
Begin forwarded message:
> From: Jim Jagielski
> Date: June 1, 2011 2:33:15 PM EDT
> To: Louis Suarez-Potts
> Cc: Italo Vignoli , Sam Ruby
>
> Subject: Re: OpenOffice and the ASF
> message-id:
>
>
> On Jun 1, 2011, at 2:18 PM, Louis Suarez-Potts wrote:
&
54 matches
Mail list logo
