incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rob Weir <robw...@apache.org>
Subject Re: CWS swbookmarkfixes01 rebasing and licensing
Date Tue, 03 Jul 2012 13:19:01 GMT
On Tue, Jul 3, 2012 at 8:58 AM, Bjoern Michaelsen
<bjoern.michaelsen@canonical.com> 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
>> <bjoern.michaelsen@canonical.com> 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:
>> >
>> >  http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-general/201106.mbox/%3CBANLkTikvBFNr1ViwqYw1+sPZf68ZX5GZ7g@mail.gmail.com%3E
>> >
>> > 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.
>

Sorry, I thought you knew about the SGA(s) already. The files covered
by the Oracle SGA(s) are listed here:

https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/ooo/pmc/ip-review/

That is what was granted to Apache.  Our 3.4 release was based on that
SGA, using the trunk version of those files.  That is what we released
under ALv2.  So in that sense the project very much has a clue what is
covered by ALv2.  We did an extensive audit of this.

I don't think it is advisable to speculate beyond that, concerning
terms on files not included in the SGA, or terms on other revisions of
those files.  What you need in that case is competent legal advice,
not some non-expert comment from someone on a mailing list.  Or talk
to Oracle.

Regards,

-Rob

Mime
View raw message