----- Original Message ---- > From: Keith Curtis <keit...@gmail.com> > To: general@incubator.apache.org > Sent: Sun, June 5, 2011 6:12:14 PM > Subject: Re: OpenOffice & LibreOffice > > On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 2:41 PM, Joe Schaefer <joe_schae...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > Look, for reasons that won't ever be aired publically, TDF > > and Oracle failed to work out amicable terms. Instead they > > worked out terms with us. We aren't all that picky about > > new initiatives, that's why we have an incubation process > > to ferret out sustainable activity from those that aren't. > > It is great that Oracle gave up OO rather than sit on it. We should be > grateful to Oracle for this gift. Note that LibreOffice deserves most > of the credit for this opportunity. > > I wouldn't expect Oracle to give it to the TDF. Apache has IBM backing > which looks more credible. > > > > > I'm happy that there are a number of people who still care about > > the OOo brand that are willing to work here under our rules. > > For those that aren't, and are more interested in the LO brand, have > > an appropriate amount of fun. We'd still like you to collaborate with > > us even if it just means the collaboration is one-way- we're funny > > like that. If our code improves your project, all we ask is that > > you respect the license it came with. > > It isn't about the OOo brand or the LO brand. This is about the > codebase, and getting as many people working in the same codebase as > possible. That enforces division of labor. You can help fix each > other's bugs if you share the same bug database. LibreOffice has > already moved to GIT. It will get harder to share code as the trees > diverge. You say you won't be the benefit of LibreOfice's work and yet > I am amazed you don't care.
We only benefit if the code is contributed to us, as we only accept voluntary contributions. Nobody is going to rifle thru LO's repository looking for juicy bits to snarf, we don't work like that. What we're hoping for is to attract devs who work on LO to join our project as committers, so whatever contributions they'd like to offer can get folded back to us without a lot of fuss. As I said earlier, the hope is that LO will pull from us for the core bits, and almost immediately we'll have the bits stored in svn mirrored to our github acct to facilitate that. While I wouldn't recommend this any time soon, at some point the ASF may try to tie access to the OOo brand to the use of a substantial amount of our software, so as not to confuse the public about the nature of the use of the mark. > > Are you saying you don't want LibreOffice to relicense your Apache > licensed work? Note of course you can only ask ;-) It seems a > paradoxical thing to ask for, to create a permissive license, and then > insist it stay permissive. I don't feel the need to debate software licensing with a GPL fan on an apache.org list. Suffice it to say that I expect downstream projects to respect the license, and sublicense it if necessary in a way that doesn't invalidate our license. There are treatments of this subject by FSF peeps on the net if you are interested (no, I'm not going to look them up here). --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
