The ASF accepts contributions from anyone. You don't have to
be "part" of the ASF to contribute. The ASF is a meritocracy,
and so the more you do, the more you *can* do, and providing
bug fixes, patches, documentation, translations are all
welcome and needed contributions (as with all FOSS projects).
As far as the 'Oracle won't make new licensing agreements', I am
not an Oracle person, but that is the clear indication they have
given me, and one will I have little doubt they mean.
On that last point, btw, LOo/TDF and others (including I think
IBM, although I know that there have been bad history and bad
blood there) are to be commended because it was the pressure
that you all provided that finally encouraged Oracle to release
the s/w. That is *not* easy. When Oracle digs in their heels,
they dig in deep (does Larry wear stilettos?). The fact that
it wasn't a revenue source for them certainly made it easier,
but a victory is a victory. Enjoy the rare one rather than
look for next one ;)
Cheers!
On Jun 4, 2011, at 8:23 PM, Laurence Jeloudev wrote:
So oracle won't make new licensing agreements with any one else except
apache which could see no contribution to the project unless your part
of ASF.
Laurence
On 05/06/2011, at 10:11, Jim Jagielski <jim@jaguNET.com> wrote:
On Jun 4, 2011, at 7:35 PM, Christian Lohmaier wrote:
Man, how I love fullquotes :-/
On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 1:20 AM, Laurence Jeloudev <ljeloudev@gmail.com> wrote:
Make a new license agreement for openoffice? With other contributing companies.
Sorry, but what is your point?
my point was that it is in my opionon a stupid idea for LO people to
sign up as contributors to the incubator proposal just "to have a say"
or "now there are no restrictions yet".
Once in Apache, there is no discussion about licences anymore. Apache
only has its own license and has made it pretty clear numerous times
that they won't allow other licenses.
Only Oracle could add another license to the mix, but if everyone
subscribes to the apache-proposal, and thus shows their support for
the apache license, why should Oracle even consider to re-license?
So I absolutely don't udnerstand what you're trying to say, especially
when you write it as a f'up to my posting.
If the reason to not "join" Apache is because you are holding
out hope that Oracle may still one day re-license, then I think
you are holding out for a lost, lost hope.
Whether OOo lives or dies in Apache, Oracle has made it abundantly
clear that this is it... This is one promise I fully expect Oracle
will keep :/
--
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
--
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
--
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
Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: [Libreoffice] Proposal to join Apache OpenOffice · Jim Jagielski
[tdf-discuss] Re: [Libreoffice] Proposal to join Apache OpenOffice · Christian Lohmaier
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.