On Sat, Jun 04, 2011 at 06:19:31PM -0400, Marc Paré wrote:
Le 2011-06-04 17:29, Christian Lohmaier a écrit :
I second that. the TDF would have been more than pleased if Oracle
would have re-licensed the code under LGPL+MPL combination (+apache
and whatever). Copyright ownership is not required at all. Neither for
Apache, nor for TDF.
ciao
Christian
Could not Apache Foundation do the same thing once it got the code?
The Apache Foundation releases software only under the Apache License 2.0.
Other entities may take ASF-released code and bundle it in products licensed
under less permissive terms, including proprietary products and copyleft
products.
What the ASF will not do is take the code that came their way via the software
grant from Oracle and release it under terms that *prevent* companies like IBM
from including it in proprietary products.
Disclaimer: I participate in projects at the ASF, but I'm speaking as just
some guy on the internet trying to help everybody out.
Marvin Humphrey
--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+help@documentfoundation.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
Context
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.