incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rob Weir <>
Subject Re: handling of ext_sources - Juergen's suggestion [was: Re: A systematic approach to IP review?]
Date Thu, 27 Oct 2011 18:38:32 GMT
On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 2:28 PM, Pedro Giffuni <> wrote:
> --- On Thu, 10/27/11, J├╝rgen Schmidt <> wrote:
>> >
>> > In any case, yes.. I think this is the way to go. I am
>> > just hoping there will be a way to opt out those
>> > components in favor of the system libraries when those
>> > available.
>> me too but we should move forward and we can change it at
>> any time when we have a better solution.
> I am OK with that, but let me attempt to dump what I think:
> 1) you are not bringing in *anything* copyleft, that directory
> will only be for the non-restrictive stuff that we need: ICU,
> Boost, etc.

I think it is like the SVN trunk.  We initially bring it all in, and
then remove the copyleft parts.  Of course if we can remove them
before hand, that is good as well.  But whatever order we do the work,
we cannot release until we've done the IP review.

The files are currently hosted here:

Since the build currently depends on that, I think we want to move
those files now, to Apache, rather than wait too long.


> 2) This will all have to be registered in the NOTICE file,
> but since this is transitory and not really stuff we use in
> base, we should start a new section there to separate it from
> the stuff we do use in the core system.
> 3) We should probably move some of the stuff in soltools
> there too (mkdepend).
> 4) I know you want ucpp there too, but since that stuff is
> used in idlc, I think I'd prefer it in idlc/source/preproc/
> as it was before. No idea if we can use the system cpp for the
> rest but that would probably make sense.
> All just IMHO, I am pretty sure whatever you do is better than
> what we have now :).
> Pedro.

View raw message