incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Oliver-Rainer Wittmann <>
Subject Re: CWS swbookmarkfixes01 rebasing and licensing
Date Tue, 03 Jul 2012 13:50:10 GMT
Hi Björn,

On 03.07.2012 14:58, Bjoern Michaelsen wrote:
> Hi Rob,
> On Tue, Jul 03, 2012 at 07:53:25AM -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
>> On Tue, Jul 3, 2012 at 7:17 AM, Bjoern Michaelsen
>> <> wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>> back in my Oracle days I did some work in CWS swbookmarkfixes01 which would
>>> be convenient not having to recreate. According to:
>>> ownership of the CWS is now at ASF. So two simple questions:
>> Where do you read that?  I don't see that statement.  I see Andrew
>> saying, "We are trying to provide all of the Oracle owned content in
>> the OOo repositories."  "Trying" is not the same as an SGA.  I'm
>> trying to lose weight.  But I can assure you my doctor will trust what
>> the scale says more than my stated intentions.
> Your aggressive tone isnt helpful here, but if you want it like that -- fine:
> If you are "trying" to clarify the situation, you fail badly. You can easily
> correct that: Just state what exactly is covered by a SGA -- I can then ask
> Oracle directly to grant the rights for the stuff that is missing. As it, you
> make it appear as if the AOO project has no clue what parts of the old OOo code
> it actually owns.

Come down a little bit.

I did not see any aggressive tone in Rob's reply.
He asked a question. Gives his view on the topic - more or less the facts he is 
seeing. Then he uses a little story from his own life regarding term "Trying" in 
order to express that measured numbers respectively contracts "count more" than 
humans expressing their "Trying". I did not see any agressive words used by Rob 
in the reply.

Best regards, Oliver.

>>> - Is this (my) work in this CWS released under AL2 to the public already with
>>>    this?
>>> - If not and I do the work to re-base this CWS against master, and have it
>>>    checked into an Apache SVN branch will the work then be immediately
>>>    available under the ALv2 license?
>> You say "(my) work".  If it is indeed your IP, then you can do with it
>> as you wish, right?
> No. If you nitpick, get your facts right. The work was created as I was a
> german employee of Oracle. IANAL, but as Urheberrecht (copyright, the claim to
> authorship) is inalienable in Germany. At that point in time, Oracle had the
> exclusive right of use for the work, but AFAIK it is still _my_ work.
>> You could make it ALv2 with or without checking
>> it into SVN.  But if it is not your IP, and your right to contribute
>> the code is questionable, then checking it into SVN would just provoke
>> someone to delete the code.
> How about, instead of wasting posts with sentences with way to many
> conditionals, you simply answer if this was covered by the SGA, so I know if I
> should hassle Oracle with that again (which I might or might not do as the CWS
> is hardly mission critcial). If I ask Oracle about this and it turns out Oracle
> already handed over code to AOO, but they had to burn ressources on that
> because AOO does not seem to be able to come clear with what it owns, that
> would throw a rather bad light on AOO, dont you think?
> But given the unconstructive reply here, I have to conclude AOO not even
> slighty interested in my casual contribution.
>> Also, isn't this essentially the same question that was raised by
>> Michael Meeks a couple of months ago?   At that point I think the
>> recommendation was for RedHat or SUSE or TDF to talk to Oracle about
>> this, since they are the rights owner.
> Indeed this seem to be the way to go, I expect to receive a clear "yes" or "no"
> from that big corporation sooner that from AOO. Kinda sad and disillusional
> actually.
> Best,
> Bjoern

View raw message