--- On Sat, 10/22/11, Norbert Thiebaud <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 9:26 PM, > Pedro Giffuni wrote: > > > >I merged some fixes from bugzilla > >that may be shared, and they have taken a lot of code > that > >they tagged as "contributed" by Oracle. > > Are you sure about that? please read the CLA which many of > the said bugzilla patches are covered with : > I am pretty sure we are safe. - I was careful not to introduce any new file. When Oracle changes the headers themselves we get all the code. - it is my understanding that Oracle will also be making legal provisions about the bugzilla database. They provided the dump, its not like we stole anything. > > > > > The problem is not really integrating the codebases > but the > > fact that the ownership of LO is so disperse and that > TDF > > is incapable of taking any relicensing decision. > > This is not a problem, this is a feature. It is a limitation. Only the copyright owner can make effective license claims so if the time comes to enforce the LGPL you will find the surprise of owning less than 10% the code doesn't help much. Copy-left + > decentralized > ownership is a very effective way to protect 'Free' > software... free > as in freedom aka 'Libre'. Linux is a prime example of > that. > Well I use FreeBSD and I am very glad to have helped Apple overthrow Microsoft. I would also like to see abundant commercial forks of Apache OpenOffice, producing new jobs, and offering new features. Its freedom without strings. > But if you want to pin-point a problem. that _IS_ the > attempt of some > corporate interest to force a unilateral re-licensing of > the project, > and then claim that 'convergence' is desirable. > If convergence was desirable, then one obvious solution > would have to > continue contributing according to the license of the > project. > The code is owned by Oracle, they paid for it, not by Novell or Redhat. Quite honestly I think some groups out there underestimate the resources SUN/Oracle put into OpenOffice. Pedro. > On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 4:02 AM, Martin Hollmichel > <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Hi, > > > > * A call to LibreOffice contributors also to > contribute their changes to > > Apache as the ASF is the long desired independent > foundation for > > OpenOffice.org. > The long desired independent foundation _is_ TDF. By the > time Oracle > did its IBM-approved tantrum, TDF had already few releases > out-the-door... > > On Sat, Oct 22, 2011 at 6:35 AM, Ian Lynch <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > It just seems that there are too many individual > interests > > outweighing such a goal at present. > > > Apache OOo fork is born out of 'corporate' interest not > 'individual' > interests. Hence the fatal license road block. > > Norbert >
