Quoted from the posting from Simon Phipps dated 12 Jan 2017:
...
The Document Foundation takes much of the Apache OpenOffice AL2 licensed
software and rebases LO on it. This allows integration of OpenSymphony
code. Completely permissible under the AL2. They re-did the license of all
the source
-1 for ASF+TDF
On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 8:43 PM, suhail ansari
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> My name is Suhail and I have some suggestions for OpenOffice community.
>
> OpenOffice is very popular and it attracts large number of downloads. My
> suggestion is that Apache
Thanks for these reminders. I was watching odftoolkit a few years ago.
Wolf Halton
Mobile/Text 678-687-6104
--
Sent from my iPhone. Creative word completion courtesy of Apple, Inc.
> On Jan 13, 2017, at 23:05, Dave Fisher wrote:
>
> Hi -
>
> If support for Microsoft
Writing a list of the top 100 defects that are easy and YOU would like fixed IS
the Apache Way. You can suggest and help. What is not the Apache Way is to
force others.
All the best!
Regards,
Dave
Sent from my iPhone
> On Jan 13, 2017, at 7:09 PM, toki wrote:
>
>>
Hi -
If support for Microsoft Office formats is desired and Java is not a problem
then Apache has a 15 year old project called Apache POI. Also, Apache
ODFToolkit is sitting in the Incubator for 5.5 years now with one developer -
Svante.
Conversion between ODF and OOXML is the only way to
+1 :-D
I will pick maybe some of the stuff up.
On 13.01.2017 21:38, Chuck Davis wrote:
Toki, I'm very glad to hear SOMEBODY has imagination! :)
It seems we've had quite a number of people coming here lately (like a
professor someplace is sending them to get involved in open source) to
state
+1!!
On 14.01.2017 00:11, Pedro wrote:
Hi Damjan, all
On 13/01/2017 17:15, Damjan Jovanovic wrote:
On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 7:02 PM, Pedro
wrote:
There are in fact a few useful features in LO that AOO does not have:
1) Opening/saving remote files from several
For the average user, the functional differences are irrelevant. More
specifically, most people use only a fraction of the capabilities. LO
offered DOCX support before AOO, and that was a difference noticeable to
most users.
For the hard core devoted follower, there are certainly
Hi Damjan, all
On 13/01/2017 17:15, Damjan Jovanovic wrote:
On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 7:02 PM, Pedro wrote:
There are in fact a few useful features in LO that AOO does not have:
1) Opening/saving remote files from several sources (OwnCloud, WebDAV,
Google Drive,
Toki, I'm very glad to hear SOMEBODY has imagination! :)
It seems we've had quite a number of people coming here lately (like a
professor someplace is sending them to get involved in open source) to
state they want to get involved. I hope they and their professors are
taking notes from your
On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 7:02 PM, Pedro wrote:
> Hi Chuck
>
> I'm a simple user so the code base and license are completely irrelevant to
>> me. What IS relevant is the way the software works. So, please, can you
>> tell me half a dozen things that LO can do that OO
Thank you, Pedro, for some specific features you use.
On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 9:02 AM, Pedro wrote:
> Hi Chuck
>
> I'm a simple user so the code base and license are completely irrelevant to
>> me. What IS relevant is the way the software works. So, please, can you
Hi Chuck
I'm a simple user so the code base and license are completely
irrelevant to
me. What IS relevant is the way the software works. So, please, can
you
tell me half a dozen things that LO can do that OO cannot do?
There are in fact a few useful features in LO that AOO does not have:
Thank you, Jonathon, for giving us something specific. I get so weary of
LO people (and most of the media world it seems) spouting how much better
LO is but I fail to see it in my use cases. Most of what you have pointed
out is not applicable to the vast majority of users I would guess. I keep
Am 13.01.2017 um 11:39 schrieb RA Stehmann:
>
> I am looking for a Template for "Game of live".
Sorry:
"Game of life"
Regards
Michael
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Am 13.01.2017 um 10:43 schrieb toki:
> ^1: All of the games (Flight Simulator, Space Invaders, Tick Tack Toe)
> have been removed from LibO and AOo. However, templates for various
> games are available.
I am looking for a Template for "Game of live".
Kind reagards
Michael
signature.asc
Hello guys.
It stays as it is. Currently a merge is not possible. I assume this request
is not taken seriously on the LO side, since most information we had in
this discussion is pointing out the differences of both sister projects and
not advocate the things they share.
If anyone really wants to
Am 13.01.2017 um 01:26 schrieb Simos Xenitellis:
>
> There is the standing issue with the old www.openoffice.org
> that has been repurposed as the front page for Apache OpenOffice.
>
> I would expect that the historical hostname "www.openoffice.org" to simply
> show
> a list of
Am 12.01.2017 um 19:21 schrieb Dave:
> On 12.01.2017 16:54, RA Stehmann wrote:
>> Is the past on topic for the future?
>
> Assuming that you are responding to my post in this thread,
I do not want to answer to your post, but the questions are caused by
the post of Nagy Ákos some minutes before.
On 12 January 2017 at 18:29, Simon Phipps wrote:
> S.
> (speaking here only as an AOO community member)
Thanks, Simon. I have long desired for there to be a useful confluence
and even convergence of code, effort, vision--I mean between LO and
AOO. Would still be nice, if only
On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 10:38 AM, Dr. Michael Stehmann
wrote:
> Hello,
>
> this discussion is really useless. We have to do more urgend tasks yet.
>
> If TDF people want to talk with us, they know where to find us. And vice
> versa.
>
> We have talked a lot in the
Hi Dave, all.
On 12 Jan 2017 22:50, "Dave Fisher" wrote:
Please correct the specific non Apache licenses if I get them wrong. As far
as I know the sequence of events is:
OpenOffice.org was originally dual licensed under LGPLv2 and SISSL (OSI
approved but now retired).
Please correct the specific non Apache licenses if I get them wrong. As far as
I know the sequence of events is:
Oracle buys Sun including OpenOffice (closed license) and the open source
OpenOffice.org (GPL2).
TheDocumentFoundation forms and forks OpenOffice.org as LibreOffice under GPL2
Thanks for the correction.
On 1/12/2017 7:38 AM, Nagy Ákos wrote:
https://www.openoffice.org/licenses/lgpl_license.html
Based on this page, OpenOffice change the license from LGPLv3 to Apache
2.0 only when Oracle donate the code to Apache Foundation in june 2011,
but LibreOffice was forked from
Nagy,
I'm a simple user so the code base and license are completely irrelevant to
me. What IS relevant is the way the software works. So, please, can you
tell me half a dozen things that LO can do that OO cannot do?
I recently was given a 30,000 row excel sheet to read into a database so
that
Is the past on topic for the future?
Is a dogmatist a good pontifex?
Regards
Michael
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
https://www.openoffice.org/licenses/lgpl_license.html
Based on this page, OpenOffice change the license from LGPLv3 to Apache
2.0 only when Oracle donate the code to Apache Foundation in june 2011,
but LibreOffice was forked from OOo in september 2010.
An article about this:
See this mail: http://legal-discuss.markmail.org/thread/mleqsm636zf5fqia
2017-01-12 6:18 GMT+09:00 Dave :
> On 11.01.2017 09:44, Patricia Shanahan wrote:
> > On 1/10/2017 11:29 PM, Nagy �kos wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> it is impossible, because the LO license is LGPL+MPL, that
On 11.01.2017 09:44, Patricia Shanahan wrote:
> On 1/10/2017 11:29 PM, Nagy �kos wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> it is impossible, because the LO license is LGPL+MPL, that can't be
>> merged in OpenOffice.
>
> That choice of license was very unfortunate, and a regrettable barrier
> to cooperation between the
Hello,
anything is possible if you want it. And if you really want it, a merger
with LO is also possible.
The problem is that AOO is way behind. Even if you don't want to hear
it: Too little has happened over the last several years. Ages ago we
discussed what to do about version 5.0 -
Am 11.01.2017 um 11:43 schrieb RA Stehmann:
> Am 11.01.2017 um 11:34 schrieb Nagy Ákos:
>> The code is owned by comunity (1500+ individual people) not by TDF.
>> Each developer own our part from code.
>>
>> And I don't think that majority from this people want to change the
>> licence, because
Am 11.01.2017 um 11:34 schrieb Nagy Ákos:
> The code is owned by comunity (1500+ individual people) not by TDF.
> Each developer own our part from code.
>
> And I don't think that majority from this people want to change the
> licence, because with LGPL+MPL the whole LO code need to be leave
e: "Patricia Shanahan" <p...@acm.org>
> À: dev@openoffice.apache.org
> Envoyé: Mercredi 11 Janvier 2017 09:44:26
> Objet: Re: future of OpenOffice
>
> On 1/10/2017 11:29 PM, Nagy Ákos wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> it is impossible, because the LO license is LGP
Am 11.01.2017 um 09:44 schrieb Patricia Shanahan:
> For most of my career, the only way I had of earning a living was
> writing software. The FSF's basic philosophy is that programmers should
> have no right to own and control the products of their labor. That does
> not seem very free to me. For
TDF could be give up these copyleft licences.
Maybe, we could create a petition to ask this
LibO, please bring back to AL v2 licence
:-)
- Mail original -
De: "Patricia Shanahan" <p...@acm.org>
À: dev@openoffice.apache.org
Envoyé: Mercredi 11 Janvier 2017 09:44:26
O
on LO
mailing-lists.
Jörg
> -Original Message-
> From: Nagy Ákos [mailto:a...@romkat.ro]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2017 9:30 AM
> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
> Subject: Re: future of OpenOffice
>
> I wrote something that is not true?
> A
2017. 01. 11. 10:26 keltezéssel, Raphael Bircher írta:
> Hi Akos
>
> Am .01.2017, 08:29 Uhr, schrieb Nagy Ákos :
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> it is impossible, because the LO license is LGPL+MPL, that can't be
>> merged in OpenOffice.
> As whole package yes, but you can ask individual
> From: Dr. Michael Stehmann [mailto:anw...@rechtsanwalt-stehmann.de]
> Hello,
>
> this discussion is really useless. We have to do more urgend
> tasks yet.
>
> If TDF people want to talk with us, they know where to find
> us. And vice
> versa.
>
> We have talked a lot in the past. But at
On 1/10/2017 11:29 PM, Nagy Ákos wrote:
Hi,
it is impossible, because the LO license is LGPL+MPL, that can't be
merged in OpenOffice.
That choice of license was very unfortunate, and a regrettable barrier
to cooperation between the projects. When LO split off they could have
kept the Apache
Hello,
this discussion is really useless. We have to do more urgend tasks yet.
If TDF people want to talk with us, they know where to find us. And vice
versa.
We have talked a lot in the past. But at the moment I can not see any
topic, which is worth to be discussed another time again.
If LO
The only way to stop this kind of discussion is to concentrate on the
release of OpenOffice 4.1.4.
We have enough code, we have enough translations. So let's move on! ;-)
Kind regards, Matthias Seidel
Am 11.01.2017 um 07:03 schrieb Jörg Schmidt:
>> From: suhail ansari
I wrote something that is not true?
About the trends:
https://www.google.com/trends/explore?q=openoffice,libreoffice
Finantial report:
https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/images/7/7e/TDFAnnualReport2015LR.pdf
https://www.apache.org/foundation/records/990-2014.pdf
2017. 01. 11. 10:21
Hi Akos
Am .01.2017, 08:29 Uhr, schrieb Nagy Ákos :
Hi,
it is impossible, because the LO license is LGPL+MPL, that can't be
merged in OpenOffice.
As whole package yes, but you can ask individual contributors to put there
code to Apache License 2.0.
The single way is that
Hi,
it is impossible, because the LO license is LGPL+MPL, that can't be
merged in OpenOffice.
The single way is that OpenOffice can merge in LibreOffice, more exactly
the OpenOffice.org is redirected to LibreOffice.org, because the OO code
is outdated compared with LO code.
The LibreOffice brand
> From: suhail ansari [mailto:iamsuhailans...@outlook.com]
> My name is Suhail and I have some suggestions for
> OpenOffice community.
>
> OpenOffice is very popular and it attracts large number of
> downloads. My suggestion is that Apache software foundation
> should talk to the document
I think we are not in a position to successfully ask what you would like us
to do. In the matter of the fact I do not believe LO does have much respect
for us, and some of us are deeply hurt.
Maybe the same on LO side.
And I am not convinced this will heal just quickly. The simplest solution
is
uhail ansari" <iamsuhailans...@outlook.com>
À: dev@openoffice.apache.org
Envoyé: Mardi 10 Janvier 2017 19:43:04
Objet: future of OpenOffice
Hi,
My name is Suhail and I have some suggestions for OpenOffice community.
OpenOffice is very popular and it attracts large number of downloads
Mardi 10 Janvier 2017 19:43:04
Objet: future of OpenOffice
Hi,
My name is Suhail and I have some suggestions for OpenOffice community.
OpenOffice is very popular and it attracts large number of downloads. My
suggestion is that Apache software foundation should talk to the document
foundat
Hi,
My name is Suhail and I have some suggestions for OpenOffice community.
OpenOffice is very popular and it attracts large number of downloads. My
suggestion is that Apache software foundation should talk to the document
foundation and ask them to merge their foundation with Apache
!
I have a small wish for future versions of OpenOffice
Quite often I have to do a lot of text documents in which the same data is
repeated many times. The solution was found - User Properties .
However, further use of this method found a few things that would be cool
slightly improve .
1. It would
отличный пакет, лучше которого я пока не нашел.
С уважением,
--
Hi developers a great product !
I have a small wish for future versions of OpenOffice
Quite often I have to do a lot of text documents in which the same data is
repeated many times. The solution was found - User Properties
51 matches
Mail list logo