Re: [tdf-discuss] Dual licensing of patches and code

Can someone from TDF confirm Simon's statement. If so, then
I will point people to that email and we'll be done.

On Mar 11, 2013, at 10:00 AM, Simon Phipps <simon@webmink.com> wrote:

> On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 1:35 PM, Jim Jagielski <jim@jagunet.com> wrote:
> exhaustively, yes, but not concretely. The exhaustive reply
> boils down to "it depends", which is really no answer at
> all. Furthermore, it implies that the simply inclusion of
> the alv2 as part of the license suite *does* change
> the dynamic, since something provided under mpl-lgplv3
> as not handed the same way "it depends"... Furthermore
> it does not describe the actual mechanism.
>
> On the contrary, the answer to your original question was clearly that the inclusion of ALv2 in 
> the licensing of a contribution does not per se prevent it being used.
>
> You have then been given a more detailed response than appears to have come from the AOO PMC: 
> that licensing alone is not sufficient for an open source project to accept any given 
> contribution.
>
> I don't understand why you continue to agitate and accuse.
>
> S.


-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+help@documentfoundation.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
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