On Sat, 2006-09-02 at 16:29 +0200, Charles Schulz wrote: > Hi, > > please read this: http://news.zdnet.co.uk/0,39020330,39282294,00.htm > The article seems to imply (but that may be my understanding of english > leading me to this conclusion) that Openoffice.org Premium or "Premium > OpenOffice" is an official build from the OOo project. I'm getting tired > by this; the software comes from a team inside the Hungarian community, > but for plenty of reasons (mainly cliparts licensed under the GPL), it > is not available on the OOo site. As a result, we have few ideas on the > quality of the software, the content bundled inside the software itself, > (see the thread on the development list about that) and above all, the > name implies that we are behind this. > > Now, don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to undermine Kami's team because > what they are doing is useful to many. But honestly, it creates > confusion in the public. I discussed this several times with him but > well, never managed to make my point clear (mostly because of the > language barrier). > > John, do you think it is necessay to react to this article?
You're right about the ZDNet article. I've posted a 'caveat emptor' comment. On the SF website the Openoffice.org premium people state "OpenOffice.org Premium is a free and open source enhancement of official OpenOffice.org" which is a pretty fair description. I think this is something we have to learn to live with. I'm not too enthusiastic about the alternatives - I have some "Thread Linux" CDs from the days when RedHat started threatening legal action against anyone who distributed RedHat software on CD and called it "RedHat"... John --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
