Thorsten Behrens wrote:
hm, I guess most rules can be gamed, by any sufficiently determined
adversary - so I would favour simple, effective bylaws, and use
common sense otherwise.
Additionally, you want to provide the proverbial Big Corp some
incentive to join - note that this was one specific shortcoming of
the OOo project. If they don't see a chance to have at least some
say, why should they sponsor developers in the first place?
Sorry, but I still see in your words the same misunderstanding between
Foundation and Community that generated my initial reply in this thread.
IMO, if a corporation wants to have a word in a decision about where the
project goes, it should join the Foundation and respect its rules.
Any other type of contribution is surely appreciated but, IMO, it's very
far from granting a *right* to influence where the project goes.
Maybe, this consideration depends on what foundation are in my country:
very strong and well defined legal entities that are different from a
Sincerely, I still see the "Foundation affair" a bit too foggy and I'm
not sure I'll like it at the end.
Impressum (Legal Info)
: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images
on this website are licensed under the
Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License
This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is
licensed under the Mozilla Public License (MPLv2
"LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are
registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are
in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective
logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use
thereof is explained in our trademark policy