Simon Phipps wrote:
On Aug 14, 2005, at 19:14, swhiser wrote:
snip
[
IBM is certainly not obligated to contribute back to OOo has no
legal, moral or technical obligation to do so. This is due to the
SISSL/LGPL licences. I believe also that the way they are using OOo
components and code may lend itself to making any of their work
non-applicable to the OOo code base. I'm speculating here and
talking from partial knowledge, so please keep that in mind; and I
invite Gary or others to suggest where I may have it wrong. -sh]
I actually believe IBM's non-contribution to be a consequence only of
SISSL, which I gather to have been the license they chose from the
dual-license for OpenOffice.org. If they'd chosen to create their
derivative work under LGPL, I believe they would have been compelled
to provide source just as they would have been if GPL had been in use.
Thank you, Simon.
S.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
