openoffice-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rob Weir <robw...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Open Office in Swedish
Date Wed, 28 Nov 2012 21:34:40 GMT
On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 4:27 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton
<dennis.hamilton@acm.org> wrote:
> Well, it is not entirely symmetrical, although that is a technicality in the bigger issues
perhaps.
>

I didn't mean to say that the licenses were symmetrical (whatever that
would mean).  I was addressing the inane comment that if Oracle had
assigned rights to TDF the fork would end.  Of course, if LO
developers assigned rights under Apache license the fork would end as
well.   Perhaps this is too obvious to state.

-Rob


> The ASF does not need to multi-license anything, since ALv2 is the most permissive of
the ones mentioned.  So ALv2 is sufficient, including on the current Apache OpenOffice releases,
for use on projects using one of the others without having to do anything further (apart from
what the ALv2 requires to be honored).
>
> That seems to be baked into the public-interest mission of the Apache Software Foundation
and it can be counted on.
>
>
>  - Dennis
>
> Aside: I don't think that the dual-licensing of current contributions to LibreOffice
(LGPL and MPL) does much.  That is insufficient to dual-license the original code base (which
is only LGPL).  I'm not sure what the theory behind that is.  Contributions of code to LibreOffice
(and Apache OpenOffice) can always be contributed elsewhere by their original contributors
of course.  Contributions to neither project are exclusive in any way.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rob Weir [mailto:robweir@apache.org]
> Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2012 13:03
> To: users@openoffice.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Open Office in Swedish
>
> [ ... ]
>>> When LO wanted to change frm LGPL to MPL they simply sent a note to
>>> their developers and asked them to return a statement saying that they
>>> agreed to include MPL license on their past and future contributions.
>>> It was simple and painless.  If they wanted to end the fork a similar
>>> note, asking for agreement to attach the Apache License, would also
>>> work.
>>>
>>> -Rob
>>>
>>
>> Presumably, Rob, that would work for Apache as well - or is it a case of *quod
>> licet Iovi non licet bovi* ? As we know, it takes two to tango....
>>
>
> As I said, it is symmetrical.  We should avoid the portrayal that one
> side is a viper's den of corporate interests and the other side
> consists of cloistered monks.  There are various interests on both
> projects.
>
> -Rob
>
>
>> Henri
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@openoffice.apache.org
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@openoffice.apache.org


Mime
View raw message