<html> <head> <meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8"> </head> <body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000"> Hi, The templates are now being collected here: <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Design/Call_for_Templates">https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Design/Call_for_Templates</a> >@Alexander Wilms: The typography templates at ><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://templates.libreoffice.org/template-center/typography">http://templates.libreoffice.org/template-center/typography</a> look beautiful and >I would like to make them a replacement for the biggest and most ugly of the >current templates, which are: > >1.1M May 19 21:57 extras/source/templates/layout/lyt-book.otp >706K May 19 21:57 extras/source/templates/layout/lyt-forest.otp >690K May 19 21:57 extras/source/templates/layout/lyt-paper.otp >639K May 19 21:57 extras/source/templates/layout/lyt-glacier.otp >638K May 19 21:57 extras/source/templates/layout/lyt-wine.otp > >which in all their ugliness do not justify the space they eat in the default >install. Any objections to that? No, that'd be fine. >Do we have any more masterpages we could use to replace the ones above? As frankly, the current ones are _really_ ugly -- so even if want you have is not >perfect, it is likely better than what we would ship with now (after replacing >the above 5 templates there would still be 25 of the old ones left). The "vintage", "fresh >and serious", "Rounded Rectagles" and "Hexagons" templates do not look too bad too me. Does anybody know the authors and can ping them if it is ok to directly >include their work under MPL/LGPLv3+? I am the author of 'vintage', 'fresh and serious' and 'hexagons' and I licensed them (and the other templates on the wiki page) under cc0/MPL/LGPLv3+, whatever you need. There's still one issue with the vintage template: It contains textures that are not licensed under the terms of cc0. I plan to replace them with some from this website: <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lostandtaken.com/gallery/vbooks3.html">http://lostandtaken.com/gallery/vbooks3.html</a> Are their terms of use enough, or do we need an explicit licensing statement? (<a href="http://lostandtaken.com">Lost & Taken</a> textures are made freely available for use in both personal and commercial projects including web templates, designs, and other materials intended for distribution. Attribution is appreciated, but not required.) >we could replace those 6 upstream with the ones from Ubuntu (excluding the >explicitly Ubuntu-branded one), which are not exactly beautiful, but better >that the defaults upstream. With that we would have 11 new masterpages upstream >(leaving us with 25-11=14 old ones we would still need to replace). Opinions? Sounds good. I now have commit access in order to work on the templates. Micheal Meeks mentioned he'd prefer flat odf files since that would make it easier to spot differences in the git repository. But apparently LO doesn't allow using those as templates. I could upload them, but someone else would need to help me with code changes. Here's the full thread: <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Where-to-store-templates-td3980690.html">http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Where-to-store-templates-td3980690.html</a> Kind Regards Alex </body> </html>