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

Re: [board-discuss] Re: [tdf-members] Discussion about options available with marketing plan draft and timetable

I support Regina's proposal.


On Mon, Jul 13, 2020 at 2:13 PM Regina Henschel <>

Hi all,

Justin Luth schrieb am 13-Jul-20 um 13:08:
I think the best solution probably lies in just using simple branding of
"LibreOffice", and "LibreOffice LTS" for eco-system branding.

I support this. In addition LibreOffice partners should be allowed to
put a "powered by XYZ" on the start screen.

As many have already said, LibreOffice Personal implies licensing -
which simply isn't true, and so is a particularly bad term. >
LibreOffice Community edition implies crippleware - which currently is
not true, and is not the intended direction. So also a poor term.

"Edition" itself is dangerous too, because it implies, that the download
from TDF might not contain all features.

The factual distinction currently between TDF LibreOffice vs Eco-system
versions is rolling releases vs Long Term Support releases. Since
"LibreOffice Rolling" would hold no meaning for most people, it is best
to go with the common suggestion to just stick with "LibreOffice". LTS
is a fairly common term for business-focused open-source, and thus
"LibreOffice LTS / supported by XXX" provides a branding distinction
that immediately conveys confidence and desirability to the business
Another distinction is the kind of support.

To make these more visible, I can think of changes for the download page:
Download option "fresh"
Download option "still".

The Document Foundation (TDF) provides LibreOffice releases on a /time
based cycle/. TDF provides a feature release half yearly, followed by
usually six bug fix releases.

Other versions, including long-term support versions, and special
services for the needs of companies and larger organizations are
available from LibreOffice partners, read /<site to be created>/ for
more details.

[// are meant to be links.]

Remove the comment "If you're a technology enthusiast, early adopter or
power user, this version is for you!" from "fresh"-rectangle.

Replace the comment "This version is slightly older and does not have
the latest features, but it has been tested for longer. For business
deployments, we strongly recommend support from certified partners which
also offer long-term support versions of LibreOffice." with the comment
"Last bug fix release for this LibreOffice series is in <month year>".

The short time where bug fixes are available for a LibreOffice series,
should make it clear to companies, that they need a different solution
than just downloading LibreOffice.

On a related topic, I also wanted to comment on the underlying tone that
some segments are using LibreOffice, but not contributing. I think that
is hard to measure because open-source is a very large field, and in my
opinion, anyone who invests well in open-source anywhere should have the
moral right to use all open-source products. So for example, a company
that supports a lot of code development for GIMP shouldn't be shamed for
not contributing/donating directly to LibreOffice even if they heavily
use it.  For me, it made most sense to "pay" for our open-source use as
a volunteer LibreOffice developer.

This is an important aspect. Shaming people for not paying for
LibreOffice without knowing the background is not the right way.

Kind regards

To unsubscribe e-mail to:
Posting guidelines + more:
List archive:
Privacy Policy:

*Simon Phipps*
*Office:* +1 (415) 683-7660 *or* +44 (238) 098 7027
*Signal/Mobile*:  +44 774 776 2816


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.