Mailing-List: contact ooo-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of sa3ruby@gmail.com designates
 209.85.220.175 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: sa3ruby@gmail.com
In-Reply-To: <E1BC19C4-B5BD-4D65-8B8A-1C93233EB592@webmink.com>
References: <BANLkTi=HV9uyQzvADD0KSLFcoPesdjfu1w@mail.gmail.com>
	<1309381916.82460.YahooMailClassic@web113503.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
	<BANLkTikDx3yVjKZJcr57o95+H=bevXn2jA@mail.gmail.com>
	<00c701cc36ec$5dab9750$1902c5f0$@acm.org>
	<BANLkTik1v+arZ8We2Z=WKaQCjQGvjWn9yw@mail.gmail.com>
	<010001cc3741$51c88740$f55995c0$@acm.org>
	<BANLkTikJJO7YPoa0t7kNMmMX-J8GKrx+ZQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<00d001cc380f$98fec4c0$cafc4e40$@acm.org>
	<1309664343.19050.3.camel@rigel>
	<1309666612.2224.4397.camel@linux-krcc.site>
	<4E14E6F1.8020700@oracle.com>
	<CAKQbXgAVyt2pDNYvUcgASXJ_Zs__bopMCaquayzRZUQpHOrhNA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAOap24KPCK+gA-yVd631bqKAL8bCmZ34VOSbToK0x9sbF9qWFQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<4E15A3E6.7040904@gmx.net>
	<E1BC19C4-B5BD-4D65-8B8A-1C93233EB592@webmink.com>
Date: Thu, 7 Jul 2011 10:32:54 -0400
Message-ID: 
 <CAFG6u8EV3Z7FrYE-9xGj1m2gy8LC6BfD8ChV52psi2xaNdqA7w@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: OOO and LibreOffice.
From: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 8:49 AM, Simon Phipps <simon@webmink.com> wrote:
>
> On 7 Jul 2011, at 13:17, Mathias Bauer wrote:
>>
>> This would at least require that someone having done that at LO would
>> contribute a patch for OOo. Having a patch could help to do the removal
>> in the same way as in LO. That could make sure that afterwards the code
>> bases became more similar and merging of code changes could become
>> easier in the future. Perhaps that's something you should suggest on the
>> LO dev list.
>>
>> (I hope this suggestion isn't seen as an offense - really, if you are
>> asking for patches you have to ask those who did the work, not those who
>> might receive it.)
>
> Not an offense, no, although we might consider it's unlikely that a volun=
teer in any project would want to do this sort of work twice. We may instea=
d want to encourage new Apache volunteers who want to join the development =
activity but need to learn how everything works to create patches that mirr=
or the cleanup at LO, as a route to learning about AOOo.

I encourage everybody who considers doing this to read sections 5 and
7 of the ICLA:

http://www.apache.org/licenses/icla.txt

> S.

- Sam Ruby