<html> <head> <base href="https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/"> </head> <body> <div> <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_NEW " title="NEW - UI: Branding: LibreOffice Personal edition" href="https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=134486#c59">Comment # 59</a> on <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_NEW " title="NEW - UI: Branding: LibreOffice Personal edition" href="https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=134486">bug 134486</a> from <a class="email" href="mailto:christos@labs.epiuse.com" title="christos@labs.epiuse.com">christos@labs.epiuse.com</a> <pre>1. SOFTWARE FREEDOM should be the focus of TDF's branding given the foundation's mission stated in #<a href="show_bug.cgi?id=134486#c23">comment 23</a>. 2. Is this marketing plan INVALIDATING THE STATUTES of TDF or hiding a change of mission under the guise of pragmatism? 3. Unless TDF is DESPERATE, the right place to promote ecosystem partners is not the UI of the software. How about, for example, the website? (Also suggested in #<a href="show_bug.cgi?id=134486#c22">comment 22</a>). 4. Having two editions is COUNTERPRODUCTIVE. - a) It undermines LO by underscoring the notion that commercial is better. What does this imply about software that is 100% commercial as opposed to being FOSS with "only" commercial extensions? - b) By extension, in the LO world the personal/community edition will be a second-class citizen. The marketing plan SAYS AS MUCH on p. 32: “volunteers supported, not suggested for production environments or strategic documents”. Since when do the makers of free software claim NOT to recommend it for production environments? - c) TDF is seen wavering in its commitment to free software. This is enough to drive away both VOLUNTEERS insulted by the statement quoted above and private DONORS (see #<a href="show_bug.cgi?id=134486#c20">comment 20</a>), increasing some of the very tensions the marketing plan laments. Community editions and the like are not the fruit of free software projects (see #<a href="show_bug.cgi?id=134486#c57">comment 57</a>). - d) It is a sign that support from ecosystem companies comes with too many strings attached (reminiscent of Canonical's foisting the Amazon button on the Ubuntu desktop). - e) What will the USERS think of this? They have not asked for a personal edition or whatever. 5. The proposed DONATION button or link would be redundant since there is Donate to LibreOffice in the Help menu before About, which could be made more prominent or rearranged. Conclusion: I fear the need to improve the current situation is creating pressure to act together with a reluctance to slam the brakes when the actions turn out to be misguided. (In reply to Telesto from <a href="show_bug.cgi?id=134486#c22">comment #22</a>) > I still surprised how many departements/ people went along with this (or let > it happen, without objecting).. based on gerrit commit: dev, ux, marketing. > There needs to be a better protocol. I have the impression that some people > letting this go along on purpose, to get it escalated, because this easier > way to make a point. > It surely works, but until people just drop out being pissed how things are > going. The statutes ought to be required reading. It is not up to UX or marketing to stray from them!</pre> </div> <hr> You are receiving this mail because: <ul> <li>You are the assignee for the bug.</li> </ul> </body> </html>