Date: prev next · Thread: first prev next last
2011 Archives by date, by thread · List index

Re: [steering-discuss] Vendor string usage in third-party package of LibreOffice


Hi,

On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 05:24:19PM +0200, André Schnabel wrote:

Am 12.05.2011 15:29, schrieb Francois Tigeot:
...
I'm starting to realize the "vendor" term should be defined: I'm only writing
packaging scripts, and many third-parties could use them to provide finished
binary packages.

In this context you may see TDF as "the original manufacturer" (of
the source code) while you are the "immediate supplier" (of the
final package containing your modifications).

Okay. In this context, the vendor would be the packager then.

Why not use something like "NetBSD pkgsrc Team" - this is more or
less what the Linux distributions do. They use "LibreOffice" but a
different vendor string, which proudly states that they did invest
some effort to bring the packages to their users.

Well, I asked the question to a group of pkgsrc developers first, and the
answer I got was to use The Document Foundation name ;-)
The wording on the website heavily influenced the discussion towards this
result.

Since I wasn't sure about that, I also wanted to have some opinion from the
LibreOffice side.

Ok, this is beyond my expertise. If it was possible to include all
what is neede in our build environment, so that anybody (any member
of TDF) could do exactly what you do - I'd agree, you use "The
Document Foundation" vendor string.

I'm not sure of the prerequisites myself.

This would of likely mean some
work (integrating your modifications upstream, testing it, maybe
making it generic ...). But by doing all this you would qualify as
TDF member - and this would be agin for me be an indication to use
"The Document Foundation" vendor string.

Hmm, another complication here: I'm a committer and I did this sort of work
in the last few months to port LibreOffice to the DragonFly BSD operating
system.
There were many OpenOffice-specific patches in pkgsrc in the past, and they
have been integrated in the LibreOffice tree by other people.

So far, there is no modification to the source code of LibreOffice in my
prototype packaging configuration.

Anyway - at this point I'd like to see the input of other SC-members
who have a better understanding what happens technically.

Sure. It would be good to be sure what to do in this case.

-- 
Francois Tigeot

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+help@documentfoundation.org
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Context


Privacy Policy | Impressum (Legal Info) | Copyright information: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images on this website are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is licensed under the Mozilla Public License (MPLv2). "LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use thereof is explained in our trademark policy.