Mailing-List: contact general-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: general@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of ralph.goers@dslextreme.com
 designates 209.85.210.47 as permitted sender)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084)
Subject: Re: OpenOffice: were are we now?
From: Ralph Goers <ralph.goers@dslextreme.com>
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTikhkhndPJ=neKQ75ToiOYuo4xRm5g@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 5 Jun 2011 16:24:04 -0700
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <5383466C-5378-46EA-A6AE-4C664D2486AD@dslextreme.com>
References: <BANLkTinqd4ZC0gembzBx4b6qvFaBsQ3zBA@mail.gmail.com>
 <BANLkTim2i_jZwPxyNxW8rt=f+L=oJVbktQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <OF683BCD50.9FF168A3-ON852578A6.006B2431-852578A6.006C73F6@lotus.com>
 <BANLkTim5UPnDBVU972t6eH_iCd2qX+Z=cg@mail.gmail.com>
 <OF5176173B.9FF2EB2F-ON852578A6.007C3F7F-852578A6.007D86B0@lotus.com>
 <BANLkTikhkhndPJ=neKQ75ToiOYuo4xRm5g@mail.gmail.com>
To: general@incubator.apache.org


On Jun 5, 2011, at 4:02 PM, Niall Pemberton wrote:

> On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 11:51 PM,  <robert_weir@us.ibm.com> wrote:
>> Niall Pemberton <niall.pemberton@gmail.com> wrote on 06/05/2011 =
06:30:06
>> PM:
>>=20
>>>=20
>>> I agree with you - in this case I think it would be better if IBM
>>> collaborated with LibreOffice, rather than seeking to compete. But I
>>> could be wrong.
>>>=20
>>=20
>> And I support 100% your right to have that opinion and to support =
whatever
>> open source project or projects you want, to worship your own God and =
to
>> drink the beer of your choice.  But if there are a "sufficient" =
number of
>> people (as determined subjectively by the IPMC) who have a different
>> opinion, and who would like to do an open source project at Apache, =
and
>> they have a proposal acceptable in other ways, then I think it should =
be
>> allowed.
>>=20
>> Otherwise this is like the Baptists telling the Methodists that they
>> cannot have a church of their own in town, because the Baptists want =
to
>> recruit a larger choir.
>=20
> It is clear from IBM switching its efforts from Harmony to OpenJDK
> that there are no religious reasons over license. Other ASF people
> have expressed in this thread that in their opinion that is reason
> enough (and I respect that view) - but IBM can't claim that. So I
> think my point still stands.

I seriously doubt IBM "switched" to the license OpenJDK is under. =
Instead, I'd guess they got a proprietary license from Oracle so they =
could continue to ship their JDK on AIX. They cannot do that in many =
other cases.  Of course, if you can find the source for IBM's JDK =
implementation then that would prove me wrong.

Ralph


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