Use of the Calligra name

[Cyrille Berger Skott]

I have added the content of my previous mail as a policy draft:
http://community.kde.org/Calligra/Policies/Use_of_the_Calligra_name

Also I have been thinking about adding the following paragraph as well (I have 
been thinking about this for a while, but discussion today with FC people 
reminded me that just expressing preference does not work with distributions).

In my view it is a clarification of what is already expressed in the "based on 
calligra" section.

== Binary distribution ==
Use of the calligra name for binary distribution is allowed for unpatched 
version without any restriction.

Light patched version of Calligra are still allowed to use the name, with the 
condition that the patch fix a compilation error, a bug fix, and has been 
approved for a future stable release of the Calligra branch it was applied to. 
We believe that minimal patching need to be applied to Calligra, but in a 
certain circumstances, a distribution might need to apply a patch before its 
actual release.

However, heavy patching, such as adding new feature, or patch that makes a 
significant change and are not judge safe for a feature branch, would make the 
resulting product fall under the derivative, and would require the need for a 
different name, and the description can countains the mention "based on 
calligra". However, if the patch add a new plugin, it is possible to keep 
using the Calligra name, as long as it is made clear that the plugin is not 
supported by the Calligra project, and not installed by default.

The reasons behind such a restrictive policy is to ensure that users get the 
Calligra experience, and also to make it easier to detect and analyse what 
problems are encountered by the users.

-- 
Cyrille Berger Skott