incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Michael Meeks <>
Subject Re: working on a OpenOffice roadmap
Date Wed, 26 Oct 2011 12:54:41 GMT
Hi Rob,

On Wed, 2011-10-26 at 07:33 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
>  But now that Oracle has put the core code under Apache 2.0 via their
> SGA, you now have the opportunity to have a consistent licensing
> policy that would be conducive to collaboration.

	Sure - that is an improvement collaboration is possible, and we can
work together to work out how best to do that; rather than having a
minority try to pre-judge the outcome :-)

> to quote Michael Meeks:

	... wresting four year old words outside the context of the situation
at the time. If politics is the art of the possible - then it pays to
(at a given time) ask for -what you think is achievable-; which is the
context of my quote.

> Now - a meritocratically constituted foundation, to which all code /
> translation etc. contributors belonged, with some truly representative
> governance - I'd love to belong to something like that & assign my
> rights to it."

	Sounds like a great description of TDF - right ? :-) though wrt.
assigning rights my view has changed quite a bit in four years.

	It seems -obvious- (to me at least) that ASF is an infinitely better
home for the project than OO.o ever was, and much of their advice and
governance input is -long- overdue. However it is also clear to me that
the ASF is sub-optimal compared to following the majority of the
development community's choice as expressed in TDF.

> Of course, now that that company running the project is his own
> company, Michael has become dogmatic about license rather that his
> previous dogmatism about  governance.  Plus ├ža change...

	... double-take ...; I'm sorry, let me try to unpack this. You doubt
that TDF is a sincerely meritocratic organisation ? that it is genuinely
open to all participants ? you try to portray it as "run by SUSE" ? is
IBM running Apache (Incubating) ? (I don't think I
insinuated that anywhere). Clearly I am thrilled that SUSE can
contribute a lot to TDF, but I'm also eager to spread and diversify our
contributor base: something we're doing quite well at I think. Again IBM
would be a most welcome participant and peer, with influence in
proportion to it's contribution (as at Apache I hope).

> > It is one thing to not 'prevent' someone from abandoning free-software
> > principles (as if anyone had such power anyway)
> > It is quite another to have "libreoffice [more exactly TDF] ask its
> > members" or contributors to do so
> is collaboration against free software principles?

	I think I outlined my case really quite clearly. I refer you to my
previous mail. Collaboration is great if done in a reasonable way.
Submitting code under a given license to a given entity clearly implies
some endorsement of that entity, and it's actions. That is something I
struggle with wrt. AOOoI for the outlined reasons.

	All the very best,


--  <><, Pseudo Engineer, itinerant idiot

View raw message