On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 11:21 AM, Rob Weir <r...@robweir.com> wrote: > On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 10:51 AM, jan i <j...@apache.org> wrote: > > On 19 February 2015 at 16:32, Rob Weir <r...@robweir.com> wrote: > > > >> On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 10:10 AM, jan i <j...@apache.org> wrote: > >> > Hi. > >> > > >> > We have a page http://www.openoffice.org/why/why_compliance.html > which > >> > seems to be like a red carpet to a number of people. > >> > > >> > There are of course people who do not like the page because they would > >> like > >> > another license to have the headline, they are not my concern (as > long as > >> > the page we produce are correct). > >> > > >> > There are also people (myself included) that feel this page can too > >> easily > >> > be misread as expressing the view of ASF and AOO. > >> > > >> > The page has lately been changed and among other a line at the bottom > has > >> > been added: > >> > " > >> > > >> > *The Apache Software Foundation does not take a position on, > recommend or > >> > advise the use or non-use of any particular software license or > family of > >> > licenses."* > >> > Surely that is enough in legal terms indicate that the page is the > >> opinion > >> > of somebody not ASF. But for many they see this as the normal > disclaimer > >> > and being on the bottom many do not even read it. > >> > > >> > We as a project cannot and should not speak on behalf of ASF, nor > should > >> we > >> > have web pages that causes longer negative discussions (I cannot > refer to > >> > the mails on private@ and elsewhere, but only say that lately we talk > >> about > >> > a lot of mails). > >> > > >> > I, as PMC member, do not see the need for a page that causes this > kind of > >> > discussions, and would prefer to see it removed....however a > statement on > >> > top of the page saying something like: > >> > "This page do not reflect the opinion of ASF or the AOO PMC" > >> > would at least stop the negative discussions. > >> > > >> > > >> > Thoughts? > >> > > >> > >> What exactly on this page do you think is an opinion and not a fact? > >> Maybe we can focus on the specifics? > >> > >> I'd note also that this is one page of several, each of which the same > >> accusation can be made. For example: > >> > >> "OpenOffice can be freely used and distributed with no license worries." > >> > >> http://www.openoffice.org/why/why_edu.html > >> > >> Certainly this is an opinion, and I don't recall the ASF or the PMC > >> voting on it? Should we remove this page as well? > >> > >> > >> And: > >> > >> "Using Apache OpenOffice demonstrates your commitment to deliver best > >> value services. It is not owned by any commercial organisation. Its > >> open source license means there are no license fees to pay, no > >> expensive annual audits, and no worries about non-compliance with > >> onerous and obscure licensing conditions. You may also distribute the > >> software free to your employees, through the schools system, or any > >> other channel of your choice." > >> > >> http://www.openoffice.org/why/why_gov.html > >> > >> Same idea, claiming that the licence of AOO is an advantage, in this > >> case to government users. > >> > >> > >> And: > >> > >> > >> And > >> > >> "OpenOffice offers a high degree of compatibility with commercial > >> office software, but with none of the costs or license worries." > >> > >> http://www.openoffice.org/why/why_sme.html > >> > >> > >> Same idea there. > >> > >> > >> And > >> > >> > >> http://www.openoffice.org/why/why_odf.html > >> > >> This page claims advantages of using ODF. Certainly this is an > >> opinion, and I don't recall the ASF or the PMC voting on it? Should > >> we remove this page as well? > >> > >> > >> I'm a bit puzzled why we suddenly think that expressing a viewpoint or > >> touting advantages of AOO is unusual or suspect. It should not be > >> odd to remark that the licence *mandatory* for use by Apache projects > >> is in some way preferable to the licence that is *forbidden* for use > >> in all Apache projects. It should not be seen as controversial to > >> note that. > >> > > > > To me life is quite simple, I get email from apache people I respect and > > know what they stand for, saying this page gives a false impression, > > not in terms of facts, but in terms of whose opinions are expressed. > > > > When my inbox start filling with such mails, I tend to take a look > > myself...and in this case I find it correct that the page looks as being > > the opinion of ASF and AOO unless you are a lawyer and read the bottom > line > > carefully. > > > > I am not in a position to discuss the actual content, and that it really > > not the discussion point. > > > > We have enough other problems, we do not need to create more....we do not > > need to make Apache friends of the project negative by not following a > > simple recommendation. It is a lot better that we show responsibility and > > act instead of running the risk, that we get told what to do. > > > > The current disclaimer was added after a discussion on the > legal-discuss mailing list (public) to make it clear that it was not > an ASF statement. As I understand it is now entirely a PMC question > and there is no one who will "tell us what to do". > > > > >> So a -1 from be for removing any of these pages. If you want a more > >> prominent disclaimer on *all* of them, then I'm fine with that. > >> > > > > I have no opinion on that the *all* part, if you think that gives a > better > > result then I am all for it. > > > > If someone wants to suggest a disclaimer that can be put on all the > "why" pages, then let's see it. Since it will need to be translated > into many languages (all these pages are part of the standard set we > translate for NL pages) it would be good to get final agreement before > we make any more changes. >
Why not just take it down, and re-publish it when there is a more agreeable content on it. > > Regards, > > -Rob > > > > rgds > > jan I. > > > > > > > > > >> > >> Regards, > >> > >> -Rob > >> > >> > >> > rgds > >> > jan I. > >> > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org > >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org > >> > >> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org > > -- Alexandro Colorado Apache OpenOffice Contributor 882C 4389 3C27 E8DF 41B9 5C4C 1DB7 9D1C 7F4C 2614
