Hence my (and others) confusion... It's a pretty easy question; at it's basic:
Would code provided under ALv2+MPL+LGPLv3 be acceptable to TDF and LO? On Mar 7, 2013, at 8:59 AM, Jürgen Schmidt <jogischm...@gmail.com> wrote: > > back from vacation I stumbled over this interesting thread and for > whatever reason my mail filter skipped Florian's answer. > > But after asking if I missed a reply I was pointed on > https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/License_Policy which is an > interesting page to read. > > Is it possible that this page is somewhat outdated and doesn't reflect > the current state of the project. I don't read anything about the Apache > License and that the project is now based on the Apache OpenOffice code > base. Otherwise it wouldn't have been possible to change the license > header in the way it was done for LO 4.0. Maybe worth to add a section > to explain this and to avoid confusion. > > It really confuses me and I am now lost a little bit. How can I as > individual contributor know where the code comes from originally. > > > Juergen > > > On 3/5/13 6:32 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote: >> >> On Mar 5, 2013, at 10:34 AM, Jim Jagielski <j...@jagunet.com> wrote: >> >>> So far, I've rec'd an answer from AOO... I'd appreciate >>> an answer from TDF as well. >>> >>> On Mar 4, 2013, at 11:39 AM, Jim Jagielski <j...@jagunet.com> wrote: >>> >>>> BTW, Please be sure that I'm on the CC list, so I get >>>> any and all responses :) >>>> >>>> >>>> On Mar 4, 2013, at 8:08 AM, Jim Jagielski <j...@jagunet.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hello there. >>>>> >>>>> This Email is being directed to the 2 controlling bodies of >>>>> the Apache OpenOffice Project and LibreOffice (TDF). You will >>>>> notice that I am sending this from my non-ASF account. >>>>> >>>>> Recently, at various conferences, I have been approached by >>>>> numerous people, both 100% volunteer as well as more "corporate" >>>>> affiliated, wondering if it was OK for them to submit code, >>>>> patches and fixes to both AOO and LO at the same time. In >>>>> general, these people have code that directly patches LO >>>>> but they also want to dual-license the code such that it >>>>> can also be consumed by AOO even if it requires work and >>>>> modification for it to be committed to, and folded into, >>>>> the AOO repo. My response has always been that as the >>>>> orig author of their code/patches/whatever, they can >>>>> license their contributions as they see fit. However, >>>>> I have been told that they have rec'd word that such >>>>> dual-licensed code would not be accepted by, or acceptable >>>>> to, either the AOO project and/or LO and/or TDF and/or >>>>> the ASF. >>>>> >>>>> Therefore, I am asking for official confirmation from >>>>> both projects and both entities that both projectsSo >>>>> are fully OK with accepting code/patches/etc that >>>>> are licensed in such a way as to be 100% consumable >>>>> by both projects. For example, if I have a code patch >>>>> which is dual-licensed both under LGPLv3 and ALv2, that >>>>> such a patch would be acceptable to both LO and AOO. >>>>> >>>>> Thank you. >>>>> >>>> >>> >> > -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
