Date: prev next · Thread: first prev next last
2011 Archives by date, by thread · List index

todd rme wrote:

On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 9:20 PM, Andy Brown
<> wrote:

Instead, what we are looking at one group
having the name and official control of the code base, and the other [...]

Nah. they will get the trademark, or more exactly, for now, a grant to _use_
the trademark from Oracle.
They have been granted a licensed on the Oracle OO code base under ALv2.
but in no way does that give them 'official control' of _the_ code base.
It just mean that they just acquired _a_ code base, and that they'll be able
to do whatever they want with it.

that does not give them 'official control' over anything we do, nor does
that make them magically upstream....

in 6,12,18 months, whenever/if they graduate and some of the change they do
make sens, we will probably treat that project as side-stream, to possibly
incorporate sensible changes they may have done, that match with our overall

We'll cross that bridge when it gets there, In the mean time, returning to
our task to improve LibreOffice is the best service we can do to our users.


View this message in context:
Sent from the Discuss mailing list archive at

Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to
Posting guidelines + more:
List archive:
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted


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.