Hi,
On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 14:37:15 -0400
Greg Stein gst...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 14:04, Simon Phipps si...@webmink.com wrote:
On 14 Jun 2011, at 18:27, Greg Stein wrote:
For a larger body of work, these kinds of (non-CLA) contributions
become less clear. And without
On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 8:40 AM, Sigrid Carrera
sigrid.carr...@googlemail.com wrote:
Hi,
On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 14:37:15 -0400
Greg Stein gst...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 14:04, Simon Phipps si...@webmink.com wrote:
On 14 Jun 2011, at 18:27, Greg Stein wrote:
For a larger
Hi Sam,
On Wed, 15 Jun 2011 09:27:17 -0400
Sam Ruby ru...@apache.org wrote:
On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 8:40 AM, Sigrid Carrera
sigrid.carr...@googlemail.com wrote:
Hi,
[...]
can someone enlighten me please? What is ICLA or a non-CLA?
I have no idea and would like to know, what you're
On 14 June 2011 06:55, Keith Curtis keit...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi all;
I had an idea that you could offer to let people triple-license their
changes.
How does that work? Surely if they licensed their work Apache it means there
is no need for the other licenses because the Apache license would
On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 12:49 AM, Ian Lynch ianrly...@gmail.com wrote:
On 14 June 2011 06:55, Keith Curtis keit...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi all;
I had an idea that you could offer to let people triple-license their
changes.
How does that work? Surely if they licensed their work Apache it
Am 14.06.2011 11:34, schrieb Keith Curtis:
On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 12:49 AM, Ian Lynch ianrly...@gmail.com wrote:
On 14 June 2011 06:55, Keith Curtis keit...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi all;
I had an idea that you could offer to let people triple-license their
changes.
How does that work?
On 14 Jun 2011, at 06:55, Keith Curtis wrote:
Hi all;
I had an idea that you could offer to let people triple-license their
changes. LibreOffice can become an upstream of Apache with this change. That
way people not interested in setting up build servers, etc. can work here
while Apache
On 14 June 2011 11:38, Keith Curtis keit...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 2:43 AM, Christoph Jopp j...@gmx.de wrote:
Not automatically. Someone might want the more restrictive license
because he wants to mix it with other code with a license incompatible
to the least
Hi,
On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 19:04, Ian Lynch ianrly...@gmail.com wrote:
I'd like to see the desktop effort here at LibO and the developers at Apache
start on a new web based OOo even if that meant starting from scratch and
writing it in Javascript. Seems to me that without a web based version
Hi,
On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 20:49, todd rme toddrme2...@gmail.com wrote:
I'd like to see the desktop effort here at LibO and the developers at Apache
start on a new web based OOo even if that meant starting from scratch and
writing it in Javascript.
It's already been done:
On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 07:00, Simon Phipps si...@webmink.com wrote:
On 14 Jun 2011, at 06:55, Keith Curtis wrote:
Hi all;
I had an idea that you could offer to let people triple-license their
changes. LibreOffice can become an upstream of Apache with this change. That
way people not
On 14 Jun 2011, at 16:16, Greg Stein wrote:
On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 07:00, Simon Phipps si...@webmink.com wrote:
On 14 Jun 2011, at 06:55, Keith Curtis wrote:
Hi all;
I had an idea that you could offer to let people triple-license their
changes. LibreOffice can become an upstream of
On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 6:00 AM, Simon Phipps si...@webmink.com wrote:
On 14 Jun 2011, at 06:55, Keith Curtis wrote:
Hi all;
I had an idea that you could offer to let people triple-license their
changes. LibreOffice can become an upstream of Apache with this change.
That
way people
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 14/06/2011 15:31, Alexandro Colorado wrote:
How exactly would that work. So far the discussion was about moving code
around, but what about generating code for both?
As a practical matter, the code would have to modified to work as
expected
On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 12:39, Simon Phipps si...@webmink.com wrote:
On 14 Jun 2011, at 16:31, Alexandro Colorado wrote:
Here is a thougt, what if i just create a patch for Apache and submit the
same patch to LibO?
How exactly would that work. So far the discussion was about moving code
On 14 Jun 2011, at 18:27, Greg Stein wrote:
For a larger body of work, these kinds of (non-CLA) contributions
become less clear. And without clear provenance, then Apache may not
be able to take it.[1]
Is the provenance that TDF secures at present sufficient for Apache's purposes?
I'm
On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 14:04, Simon Phipps si...@webmink.com wrote:
On 14 Jun 2011, at 18:27, Greg Stein wrote:
For a larger body of work, these kinds of (non-CLA) contributions
become less clear. And without clear provenance, then Apache may not
be able to take it.[1]
Is the provenance
On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 8:49 AM, Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com wrote:
That is great news! Reading over the archives, I was surprised
how some people who wished to contribute to both LOo and OOo
were turned away (with a we don't want your kind here),
and so seeing how LOo would now be open
18 matches
Mail list logo
