On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 8:22 AM, Stefan Monnier
wrote:
> Currently, LEDE has the same problem as LibreOffice, but compounded by
> the fact that most people have no idea what LEDE is, let alone that it's
> somehow related to OpenWRT.
Not only this, but LibreOffice and OpenOffice are both, well,
>> - While brands have value, you can change a name without losing all the
>> brand recognition. I'm thinking here of cases like XBMC->Kodi or
>> OpenOffice-> LibreOffice.
> I would point at OpenOffice -> LibreOffice as a failure of name changes.
There are several aspects in a name change. E.g.
On 22/12/2016 09:40, David Lang wrote:
> On Wed, 21 Dec 2016, Stefan Monnier wrote:
>
>> - While brands have value, you can change a name without losing all the
>> brand recognition. I'm thinking here of cases like XBMC->Kodi or
>> OpenOffice->LibreOffice.
>
> I would point at OpenOffice ->
On Wed, 21 Dec 2016, Stefan Monnier wrote:
- While brands have value, you can change a name without losing all the
brand recognition. I'm thinking here of cases like XBMC->Kodi or
OpenOffice->LibreOffice.
I would point at OpenOffice -> LibreOffice as a failure of name changes.
David Lang
_
On Wed, 21 Dec 2016, Dave Taht wrote:
On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 12:29 PM, David Lang wrote:
On Wed, 21 Dec 2016, Kathy Giori wrote:
From a PR perspective, I strongly suggest keeping the term OpenWrt as
part of the branding of the project moving forward. It can just be
cosmetic (web site, etc.)
On 12/21/2016 6:01 PM, Stefan Monnier wrote:
So maybe it's a good idea to use the (still hypothetical, but hopefully
close) merge to advertise a rename which will both aim to carry-over the
brand recognition at the same time as it sends the message that it's
something "new and better" (i.e. keep
> Yocto. If lede were to succeed in meeting its other goals, coherently,
> preserving "lede" and moving forward as a separate project does make
> sense.
I don't have a clear opinion either way, but I think there are several
points to take into account:
- OpenWRT indeed has a fair bit of positive n
On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 12:29 PM, David Lang wrote:
> On Wed, 21 Dec 2016, Kathy Giori wrote:
>
>> From a PR perspective, I strongly suggest keeping the term OpenWrt as
>> part of the branding of the project moving forward. It can just be
>> cosmetic (web site, etc.) but the name has so much histo
On Wed, 21 Dec 2016, Kathy Giori wrote:
From a PR perspective, I strongly suggest keeping the term OpenWrt as
part of the branding of the project moving forward. It can just be
cosmetic (web site, etc.) but the name has so much history, and
positive connotation, that you don't want to lose that
Hi all,
To clarify, the reason for integrating the OpenWrt patches into the LEDE
tree is that in the future, at an agreed point in time for both parties,
the OpenWrt trunk would be rebased from the LEDE tree, giving the
community a "clean" trunk going forward.
(Hopefully at that time, the "t
Great achievement. Congratulations to all involved.
On the naming topic have in mind the weight OpenWRT has given its history
in all these years. I personally think this point is the easiest.
Given the agreements continue hopefully there will be a single one great
project again soon with all bene
On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 10:06 AM, Hauke Mehrtens wrote:
> We had multiple meetings to find a solution to solve the problems
> between the OpenWrt and the LEDE project and to discuss a possible
> merge. Everyone with commit access to LEDE and all OpenWrt core
> developers were invited to these meet
We had multiple meetings to find a solution to solve the problems
between the OpenWrt and the LEDE project and to discuss a possible
merge. Everyone with commit access to LEDE and all OpenWrt core
developers were invited to these meetings. We had productive and
friendly discussions about the proble
13 matches
Mail list logo
