Date: prev next · Thread: first prev next last
2013 Archives by date, by thread · List index

On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 7:46 AM, Charles-H. Schulz <> wrote:


I do not know who made these assertions to this entity, however it is
really important to understand that it was not the Document
Foundation. We have never been in contact with such parties.

Let me stress again that it is necessary for this entity to contact us


It's beginning to be clearer and clearer that the "entity" does not wish to
be named as I think at least 10-15 times in this thread the information has
been requested but has subtly been ignored by the OP.

IMO (just to be clear to OP - I do not speak on behalf of the TDF as a
whole) the thread should be closed at this point in time as we're up to 30
posts with a circular pattern - OP requests information about hypothetical
contributor under dual or tri license, TDF requests potential contributors
to contact TDF directly, OP goes back to requesting information.

The whole thread seems quite strange to me as there appears to be an effort
to hide who is actually thinking of contributing.

*Joel Madero*
LibreOffice QA Volunteer

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.