On 01/06/2011 Robert Holtzman wrote:
On Wed, Jun 01, 2011 at 09:51:09AM -0700, NoOp wrote:
<http://blog.documentfoundation.org/2011/06/01/statement-about-oracles-move-to-donate-openoffice-org-assets-to-the-apache-foundation/>
TDF's statement included :
"Today we welcome Oracle’s donation of code that has previously been
proprietary to the Apache Software Foundation, it is great to see key
user features released in a form that can be included into LibreOffice."
Since when is OOo proprietary?
I actually asked for a clarification in one of the first comments (#7 at
above link), more than 48 hours ago, but nothing happened so far.
Either the sentence just means that the code in OpenOffice.org and
LibreOffice dating back to around 15 years ago was at that time
proprietary (and this would be totally irrelevant in context, and I
wouldn't know why someone would write it and relate it to "key user
features released in a form that can be included into LibreOffice")...
...or it means that people who wrote that blog post know that Oracle
released more than just the OpenOffice.org code (and here the candidates
would obviously be the proprietary components of "Oracle Open Office":
incremental updates, Alfresco plugin, migration tools... why not, even
Oracle Cloud Office).
I hope that the right interpretation is the latter, since this would
mean a significant advance available for OpenOffice.org-based suites.
But I really cannot guess what the statement meant. The OpenOffice.org
Apache Incubator Proposal does not contain elements that would justify
that sentence in the Document Foundation statement.
Privacy Policy |
Impressum (Legal Info) |
Copyright information: 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.