Ian Lynch wrote:
On 5 June 2011 14:10, todd rme <toddrme2178@gmail.com> wrote: If that means using some licenses that are less than ideal from a philosophy point of view then so be it.
That argument cut both way... except that apparently in your model, 'philosophies' or more exactly 'principles' should be dropped for the 'greater good' as long as these are not _your_ principles. and as a side note... * I find it extremely arrogant and insulting for a project that hasn't even built anything yet to self-proclaim itself as 'upstream'. * I find the argument: 'it's not our fault, Oracle made us do it by releasing they code under AL2" very unconvincing. I feel it is like saying.. well Joe offered me that present wrapped in my favorite color... it was a loaded gun without safety... what else could I do but start shooting ? You're entitled to do as you want... but this attempt to wash your hand of any responsibility for the consequences of your actions... and even better to preemptively point a finger to the group that has been working very hard to get that stick out of the proverbial mud it was in, is - how to I put that nicely - objectionable... Norbert PS: when I use 'you' above, I don't mean necessarily _you_ personally, but _you_ as in the group that promote this move. -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Proposal-to-join-Apache-OpenOffice-tp3022088p3028621.html Sent from the Discuss mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- 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