I have gone through the licence document. I am having another fundamental question w.r.t LO and AOO.
Why both AOO and LO, which are open source, are required in this world? Can just one serve the purpose? Both the group of volunteers are making wheels of same specification. With Warm Regards V.Kadal Amutham 919444360480 914422396480 On 7 June 2013 19:47, Rob Weir <[email protected]> wrote: > On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 9:59 AM, Kadal Amutham <[email protected]> wrote: > > Thanks Mr. Dave for clarification. Is the policy statement in line with > > this discussion in the thread? Can you give the link of the policy > > statement? > > > > Apache policy on releases is here: > > http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html > > But that policy only concerns what we do at Apache, within Apache > projects. The rights and responsibilities of those who use our > releases (including the source code in our releases) is set out in the > license: > > http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.html > > But beyond policy and license there are the unwritten rules and > expectations of how open source communities behave. These are > cultural values, things like the sharing (rather than "hoarding"), of > giving proper recognition/credit for contributions, etc. > > Regards, > > -Rob > > > > > > With Warm Regards > > > > V.Kadal Amutham > > 919444360480 > > 914422396480 > > > > > > On 7 June 2013 18:22, Dave Fisher <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> Hi, > >> > >> There is a policy in place for the whole of the Apache Software > Foundation > >> and that is the Apache License 2.0. > >> > >> If we want to have a statement then we can clearly state that this > allows > >> reuse so long as trademarks, other included licenses and copyrights are > >> respected. > >> > >> This is why we have a NOTICE and LICENSE in all of our releases. > >> > >> When we vote on a release we are saying that this is in order first. > That > >> the software works is secondary. > >> > >> Regards, > >> Dave > >> > >> Sent from my iPhone > >> > >> On Jun 6, 2013, at 11:06 AM, Kadal Amutham <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> > I think we should clearly frame a policy statement w.r.t code reuse by > >> > others, and AOO taking code from other sources, put in the website for > >> all > >> > to know. > >> > > >> > With Warm Regards > >> > > >> > V.Kadal Amutham > >> > 919444360480 > >> > 914422396480 > >> > > >> > > >> > On 6 June 2013 20:24, Louis Suárez-Potts <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > > >> >> > >> >> On 2013-06-06, at 16:38 , Kadal Amutham <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> > >> >>> This reminds me of a movie of Jackie Chan. I think the name of the > >> movie > >> >> is > >> >>> "Police Story". The movie comes to an end. Afterwards there was a > short > >> >>> film. A small boy was very hungry. His father steals a loaf of bread > >> >> from a > >> >>> bakery to feed his son. The police arrives at that time and kills > the > >> >>> father. Then Jackie Chan comes and consoles the boy, "This world is > >> very > >> >>> bad. But we should live in righteous way" > >> >> > >> >> Your point is somewhat complicated by the fact that Jackie Chan has > done > >> >> tremendous work to remove the triads from informing the HK movie and > >> >> Cantopop scene. And he's also recently gotten into some trouble for > his > >> >> efforts. (Just Google "jackie chan triads".) It's been a long fight > of > >> his. > >> >> But when he made Police Story A (I think it's the one you refer to, > the > >> >> homage to Buster Keaton; this was back in the 80s), the triads were > >> >> profoundly dominant and determined not just what got made but who > made > >> it > >> >> and for how much. Their control made (or makes) the studio regime in > >> >> Hollywood (which ended mid-20th cent., more or less) pale by > comparison. > >> >> (Bollywood does not have anything like this, either, I believe.) As a > >> >> result of the triads' control, actors like Chan (but one could also > name > >> >> many, many others) would make far more films each year than their > >> Hollywood > >> >> compeers and for far less--and under far, far worse circumstances. > (The > >> >> film, Painted Faces, ostensibly about Samo Hung's and Chan's early > >> >> training, I recall, could also be read as about the film industry in > HK. > >> >> But it's been years since I studied this, so my data are doubtless > >> rusty.) > >> >> > >> >> I don't think that we actually have an answer to the problematic > that's > >> >> been pointed out except the one I suggested: simply inform the world > of > >> >> what is actually going on. Right now, the world, which is to say that > >> >> segment fed by the tech writers and who read self-serving blogs, > believe > >> >> that LO is the acme of originality and community and that AOO is the > >> spawn > >> >> of something else. > >> >> > >> >> License allows for many things; that's its point. But being honest > about > >> >> one's doings and acknowledging debt is also very important in the > >> >> construction of community. > >> >> > >> >> louis > >> >>> > >> >>> With Warm Regards > >> >>> > >> >>> V.Kadal Amutham > >> >>> 919444360480 > >> >>> 914422396480 > >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> On 6 June 2013 19:54, Rob Weir <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >>> > >> >>>> On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 2:56 AM, Louis Suárez-Potts < > [email protected]> > >> >>>> wrote: > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> On 2013-06-06, at 02:23 , Kadal Amutham <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>>> Thanks Andrea for the response. In general how our community > feels > >> >> about > >> >>>>>> this process? > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> This is the nature of open source. Equally, as Andrea points out > and > >> as > >> >>>> I think most would agree, what is crucial is acknowledging the > >> debt--and > >> >>>> then also to pay it back by contributing *back* to OpenOffice. > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> So, the issue is not that Libre Office or any other derivative > uses > >> >>>> Apache OpenOffice code, the issue is rather whether they contribute > >> >> back to > >> >>>> the project to which they are indebted. > >> >>>> > >> >>>> And that is the great irony, or hypocrisy even. If you recall, LO > >> >>>> touted the GPL as necessary to ensure that companies would share > their > >> >>>> code, and argued that adherence to a copyleft license was > necessary to > >> >>>> force corporations to behave. But now we see the main LO sponsors > -- > >> >>>> Redhat and Suse -- taking code, but refusing to share or > cooperate. > >> >>>> Their problem is they've formed a self-interested leadership group > >> >>>> that benefits financially from the continued existence of LO. So > >> >>>> anything that would end the fork would end their self-assigned > >> >>>> privileges. > >> >>>> > >> >>>> -Rob > >> >>>> > >> >>>>> And the larger campaign is then to inform the tech press of the > >> >>>> imbalance, if that is what it is. For right now, it seems that the > >> tech > >> >>>> press wrongly believes that Libre Office is in the vanguard and > that > >> >>>> OpenOffice is limping along, in arrears. > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> louis > >> >>>>>> > >> >>>>>> With Warm Regards > >> >>>>>> > >> >>>>>> V.Kadal Amutham > >> >>>>>> 919444360480 > >> >>>>>> 914422396480 > >> >>>>>> > >> >>>>>> > >> >>>>>> On 6 June 2013 00:54, Andrea Pescetti <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> >>>>>> > >> >>>>>>> On 05/06/2013 Kadal Amutham wrote: > >> >>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>> In one of the threads, there was a discussion regarding source > >> code > >> >>>> of AOO > >> >>>>>>>> being used by LibreOffice. Please correct me if I am wrong. > >> >>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>> This is correct and well known (well, maybe not as widely known > as > >> it > >> >>>>>>> should be). Code from all version of Apache OpenOffice has been > >> >> reused. > >> >>>>>>> Notable examples include Armin's SVG import and Andre's Sidebar > >> work. > >> >>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>> If this happens this shall be considered as a credit by AOO > >> >> community. > >> >>>> We > >> >>>>>>>> shall feel happy to share our code in full or in part. What we > can > >> >>>> expect > >> >>>>>>>> in return is mention of contribution of code by AOO community. > >> >>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>> It is acknowledged most of the times, even though it is not done > >> very > >> >>>>>>> prominently and at times individual contributors are credited > >> instead > >> >>>> of > >> >>>>>>> the Apache OpenOffice project (which would probably be clearer). > >> >>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>> Regards, > >> >>>>>>> Andrea. > >> >> > >> > ------------------------------**------------------------------**--------- > >> >>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: marketing-unsubscribe@** > >> >> openoffice.apache.org< > >> >>>> [email protected]> > >> >>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: marketing-help@openoffice.** > >> >>>> apache.org<[email protected]> > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> >>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: > [email protected] > >> >>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: > >> [email protected] > >> >>>> > >> >>>> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> >>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: > [email protected] > >> >>>> For additional commands, e-mail: > [email protected] > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > >> >> For additional commands, e-mail: > [email protected] > >> >> > >> >> > >> > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > >> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > >> > >> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > >
