Date: prev next · Thread: first prev next last
2020 Archives by date, by thread · List index

[board-discuss] Re: [tdf-members] Board statements to the 7.0 rc "Personal Edition" label


Hi everyone,

Am 06.07.20 um 19:50 schrieb Franklin Weng:
Due to draft and development work in the area of branding and
product naming, in particular related to the “Personal Edition” tag
shown in a LibreOffice 7.0 RC, have started on several communication
channels.
2. Due to the short time frame we are working with the tagline 
appeared on the RC and we apologise if this caused some of you to 
think we unilaterally implemented the change. Rest assured that the 
consultation with the Community is still ongoing.

The people involved in the decision set this time frame themselves.
Nothing is forcing this change to be made in the LO 7.0 release cycle.

Sure the major version bump will already increase visibility, which will
eventually amplify the "Personal" edition change. I can understand this
rush. Still please don't try to blame this "secret" change being done
due to some "unchangeable forces". FWIW the release plans could even be
changed, if "people" agree.

3. This "Personal Edition" tag ... The marketing plan is still under 
development and discussion so we are eager to receive and evaluate 
your feedback!

6. ...; certainly we don’t want to make any decisions that is backed
only by a small minority.

7. This is a complex decision involving many overlapping concerns...

It feels strange, that this information is officially shared "after the
fact" (as in "after the LO source was patched"). I'm aware that the
patch can be easily reverted; that is not the point. My point is, a
minority made this decision, not the community / TDF members, and now it
should be discussed by the community. This is not about the proposed
changed, just the seemingly "secret" implementation.

And I personally think, arguments like Michael Meeks (quoting from IRC):

"Individual users don't need to contribute, but they would be OK with
Personal. But corporate users, that also don't have to contribute, must
realize that any software used in a business process must be supported
by some spercific people: either their employees, or hired staff."

are simply invalid. LO is free software, so everyone can use it, not
just a "person", like it's IMHO implied by the rename. I guess the
people are already aware of the support implications, and otherwise
don't care. And if not, then this should be made more prominent.

What eventually will happen is a lot of people wondering, what is going
on. No idea, if this will be good or bad marketing in the end; either
for the commercial LO editions or the (now) "personal" TDF one. There
are also enough other (mostly non-free) office suites available.

Maybe it would simply be better to offer downloads to the TDF version,
clearly stating the 6 / 9 months support cycle and linking to the
"Professional Support" page, stating that commercial versions with
longer support cycles and paid support are available (just stating this
fact as it) and TDF endorsed, then these naming shenanigans?

ATB

Jan-Marek

-- 
To unsubscribe e-mail to: board-discuss+unsubscribe@documentfoundation.org
Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/
Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy

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.