This is my first post on this discussion list. I am not into the deep
things of licensing, but I have kept an eye open to understand it
better. This discussion list is helping me understand the whole
I may be wrong in my opinion, so I am open to change.
I believe that a completely open source project like this one is
necessary to keep things clear. By this, I mean, that keeping a
licensing model clearly open source where businesses will not be
benefitting without contributing is important.
By setting a contrast with the two extremes - proprietary/OpenSource -
it helps me to understand the whole concept better. If we keep
LibreOffice as it is, in my opinion, will be better. It will represent
the extreme end of the spectrum helping keep tensions up so that the
in-between licensing models will have something to base themselves on
(i.e. Apache, etc.).
Conclusion: I vote for LibreOffice to remain as it is.
I have not wanted to post before as I needed to get a little more
familiar with this community. Since then I have noticed that various
kinds of comments are made freely on this forum, so I am feeling more at
liberty (LIBRE!!!) to comment.
Please correct me if I am wrong,
regards to all
Em 04-06-2011 11:21, Simos Xenitellis escreveu:
On Sat, Jun 4, 2011 at 4:31 PM, Eduardo Alexandre<email@example.com> wrote:
In my opinion, after all history involving OpenOffice, the ideal would be that
this code was donated to the TDF. Everything under the GPL.
With the software under the Apache license, we can not "work directly" in
LibreOffice because they can not use our effort due to license GPL-Apache.
Thus, we must direct our efforts to the software under the Apache license
and "reuse" what we want to LibreOffice.
But it will also allow our volunteer work is used by large companies to "create
" an unopened product for sale. We will be working for free.
This is interesting? What is the advantage for the "community"?
IBM already has an OpenOffice product called IBM Lotus Symphony,
Although based on OpenOffice, it is closed-source due to a special
deal with Sun.
If you try to download it, you are presented with a typical restricting EULA.
I believe that IBM, pushing for Apache OpenOffice, want to get the
best of the work of the community in order to enhance their product,
and start selling to business customers.
IBM employees claimed that they will make parts of Lotus Symphony
available to Apache OpenOffice, however it is not clear what is in
Lotus Symphony and what will make it into Apache OpenOffice.
With Apache OpenOffice, IBM would probably get an unfair advantage to
sell their proprietary OpenOffice. And this would be bad for the
Just like the Linux kernel is copyleft (GPL) and everyone contributes
to a single project, OpenOffice/LibreOffice should be copyleft, so
that all work goes to one place and is able grow fast.
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to firstname.lastname@example.org
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
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