incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Cor Nouws <oo...@nouenoff.nl>
Subject Re: OpenOffice.org: Question to IBM regarding license of Lotus Symphony
Date Sun, 05 Jun 2011 22:40:12 GMT
Hi Sam,

Sam Ruby wrote (04-06-11 16:00)
> On Sat, Jun 4, 2011 at 8:30 AM, Cor Nouws<oolst@nouenoff.nl>  wrote:
>> Sam Ruby wrote (04-06-11 13:35)
>>> Sat, Jun 4, 2011 at 6:24 AM, <A.Kuckartz@ping.de> wrote:
>>
>>>> If yes: which licenses would IBM be willing to consider ?
>>>
>>> Is there any reason to believe that the Apache License, Version 2.0 is
>>> not an appropriate choice in this situation?
>>
>> Yes. As expressed by many on this list and elsewhere: the Apache license
>> policy does not match for at least part of the LibreOffice project.
>> So starting with finding a common ground first, rather than starting with
>> the Apache model, would have been a better approach, IMO.
>
> This question can be looked at from multiple perspectives.  I will
> start by acknowledging your perspective as a valid perspective.  I
> will close by asking that you acknowledge mine in a likewise manner.
>
> In order to cast the widest possible net, it is important to pick a
> license that seeks to permit the widespread use of the code, being
> inclusive of both Free and proprietary software products alike.

In general yes. And the details of the licences providing that 
inclusiveness,  as well as if the assumption really holds, of course 
depend on the specific situation.
Choosing a start that you know will bring you in conflict with a fast 
maturing foundation, delivering a rewarded project, strongly backed and 
enjoying support from the larger part of the old non-Oracle 
OpenOffice.org community as well as a growing amount of free developers 
... In this specific situation you take a big risk. Namely ... hmm, read 
the other mails for that.

> I fully understand that that is just one possible criteria for a
> license choice.   While other choices may make sense depending on the
> specific circumstances, a necessary consequence of making a choice
> that does not cast the widest possible net is fragmentation.

Yes, just wrote about that.
>
> Before proceeding, can I get you to acknowledge that as a valid perspective?

Well, it is above. But I'm not sure if further debate will bring us to a 
point where you acknowledge that trying to find a common ground first 
would have be useful - and that was my question a but further above.

Regards,

-- 
  - Cor
  - http://nl.libreoffice.org


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org


Mime
View raw message