On 5 Jun 2011, at 16:20, Jim Jagielski wrote:
Personally, I don't think it's "inevitable" at all, nor do I
think it the place for people to make such statements on behalf
of communities that they have, as far as I know, only limited associations
with.
Actually I am a TDF Member and have a long-standing account at OpenOffice.org. I have been
associated with OpenOffice for about a decade in a variety of roles. I don't cut code at OOo, and
I've not had cause to engage in many public discussions lately for reasons to do with employment
transitions, but I am still a proud and eager supporter of OpenOffice.org globally with, I think, a
good grasp of both its history and issues.
If we want to turn this discussion into an ideological debate about
copyleft and non-copyleft, then I think it's a mistake.
Hey, chill. As Sam says, there's no ideology involved, just choices. The last thing I want is an
ideological debate because I already know how it turns out. That's why I think it would be far
better not to keep making proposals whose most likely response is an explanation of how licensing
is the issue blocking them.
But just
recall that even the FSF admits that AL2.0 is the best license
where free/open standards are competing with non-free/proprietary
ones.
See Bradley Kuhn's rebuttals to Rob Weir[2][3].
(PS: True, people who choose "only" copyleft won't be "welcome" at
the ASF (they would be welcome, really, it's just that the ASF
just does AL2... it's just an environment in which they might
feel as outsiders), but neither would those people who choose
"only" non-copyleft feel welcome at TDF...
Which is what I said, yes. It's just how it is, no value judgements.
I think most people
are true pragmatics and choose the best license for the job at
hand.)
While that's a true statement, different and reasonable people come to different conclusions about
what the superset of possible "best licenses" available for pragmatic choice actually is. We are
not all alike. Pretending we are starts bad arguments.
Really, what is so wrong about discussing how to get the two activities collaborating the best they
can? Why is your only proposal "leave here and join us"?
S.
[1] http://www.documentfoundation.org/foundation/members/
[2] http://www.robweir.com/blog/2011/06/apache-openoffice.html#comment-18558
[3] http://www.robweir.com/blog/2011/06/apache-openoffice.html#comment-18807
--
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: Proposal to join Apache OpenOffice (continued)
[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.