On 6/27/05, Eric Hoch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Stealing was too hard a word. Sorry. I didn't want to accuse you of > illegal activity and I don't wanted to be offensive but which other > word should I have used? From a X11 porters view you take the work > of others, fix and modify it where it is necessary and once this > all is done you claim to have done everything from the beginning to > the end by yourself and if you mention that Neo/J is based you are > as vague as possible.
Um, I believe the word you are looking for is "modifying" - it's standard opperating procedure for "OPEN SOURCE" projects. Someone takes the code, which you willingly supply, and take great pains to make sure the legal license provides for, and changes it to meet their needs. It's exactly what *OPEN*Office.org is all about, being "OPEN" - or did you not pick up on that? It's not stealing when you put it outside and put a HUGE FREAKING SIGN over it that says "FREE - PLEASE TAKE ONE!" EIther OpenOffice.org is open, and people can change it and sell it and give it away and call it whatever they want, etc. (which is all apart of one or both of the licenses that OOo is offered under) - OR- it's not. I wish people would stop complaining when people use OOo is ways that are legal and expressly spelled out for them in the license that OOo is offered under. NeoOffice/J goes above and beyond the call of duty with their website and their program, by giving credit to both the open source community of OpenOffice.org and Sun Microsystems. You don't have to do either to fulfill the licenses. Neo/J does both on their website, on the splash screen, in the about box, and in other documentations. Being offended or upset at them is not cool, and is a good movativation for them to *stop* giving *ANY* credit to OOo. -Chad --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
