Le Ven 12 octobre 2007 12:20, Diabolic Preacher a écrit : > On 12/10/2007, Florian Effenberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> In general, people are free to sell OpenOffice.org, our license >> permits that. > ...but the media reports that important contributions like an > optimzation solver and many other updates from various distro teams > are not accepted upstream in cases where Sun wants to have the > ownership of it or something. That's a different problem. You can't force third-parties to work through OpenOffice.org, you have to offer them conditions that make it worthwhile for them to work with you (a licensing that forbid third-party OpenOffice.org versions would in itself sufficient to make a lot of entities invest time on other solutions). Just as SUN may decide relinquishing a little control over OpenOffice.org may not be worth the extra contributions the project would get, other entities may decide having some code merged at OpenOffice.org is not worth the degree of control SUN asks over this code. I personally think SUN management has always mis-evaluated the balance of its open-source projects, and tends to value the short-term convenience of control over the long-term benefits of more open approaches. In particular SUN's current problems with .Net-Mono-OOXML/Microsoft-Novell can be traced directly to the years it kept an iron grip over Java, focused on the lucrative Solaris J2EE segment, and prevented anyone else from turning Java in a decent desktop Linux technology. Regards, -- Nicolas Mailhot --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
