The reason for my questions is that I hope that answers might in some way potentially help to avoid separate code bases for OpenOffice.org / LibreOffice or at least make it possible to avoid that for parts of the code.
Some kind of reasonable relation between Lotus Symphony and Openoffice.org / LibreOffice obviously is needed. *** My opinion is that some kind of copyleft license might be better suited for this type of software than a non-copyleft license. The difference between libraries, frameworks etc. which are mostly used by developers and end user applications might be decisive. I am aware of great existing proprietary products usable by end users built using software produced in ASF projects but I can not point to any ASF application which is easily usable by non-developer end users (I would be glad to be corrected ;-). Maybe that has something to do with the license. At the same time I think that a strong community around a project is (regularly) more important than the license used by it. In other words: perhaps there are parts of OpenOffice.org for which the Apache License 2 is more appropriate than it is for other parts. Cheers, Andreas --- Am 04.06.2011 13:35, schrieb Sam Ruby: > On Sat, Jun 4, 2011 at 6:24 AM, Andreas Kuckartz <a.kucka...@ping.de> wrote: > >> > If yes: which licenses would IBM be willing to consider ? > Is there any reason to believe that the Apache License, Version 2.0 is > not an appropriate choice in this situation? Am 04.06.2011 13:35, schrieb Sam Ruby: > On Sat, Jun 4, 2011 at 6:24 AM, Andreas Kuckartz <a.kucka...@ping.de> wrote: >> >> So my question to IBM is: >> Are you willing to consider open-sourcing IBM Lotus Symphony (even if >> only parts of it) ? > > While I work for IBM, I don't work for that part of IBM. That being > said, I do believe that we already have an answer to that question. > IBM has indicated that they are willing to contribute to a project > made available under the Apache License, Version 2.0, which is a > recognized Open Source license. Some of these contributions will be > derived from the current IBM Lotus Symphony offering. > > As you are undoubtedly aware, IBM contributes to a number of projects, > including Linux. Contributions to each project are made consistent > with the license terms of that project. > >> If yes: which licenses would IBM be willing to consider ? > > Is there any reason to believe that the Apache License, Version 2.0 is > not an appropriate choice in this situation? > > - Sam Ruby --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
