Re: [tdf-discuss] Oracle Contributor Agreement and LibreOffice contributions
Kohei: That's the wrong assumption I was trying to point out. It's not always applied as-is, and in fact it's rare that patches be accepted as is. Even we don't do that too often. Nonetheless, saying it's better for us if you don't submit your patches to OOo is kind of like saying Lets hope OOo don't spot this bug/issue. It's ethically dubious. If this is the official approach, then why not just make a clean break with OOo and not even try to merge in any future OOo code changes with the LO code? Phil Hibbs. -- -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] Oracle Contributor Agreement and LibreOffice contributions
On Thu, 2011-02-24 at 15:51 +, Phil Hibbs wrote: Kohei: That's the wrong assumption I was trying to point out. It's not always applied as-is, and in fact it's rare that patches be accepted as is. Even we don't do that too often. Nonetheless, saying it's better for us if you don't submit your patches to OOo is kind of like saying Lets hope OOo don't spot this bug/issue. It's ethically dubious. If this is the official approach, then why not just make a clean break with OOo and not even try to merge in any future OOo code changes with the LO code? *sigh* I'll keep it short. * The decision should be up to the patch submitter. We are not in a position to tell him or her what to do. * Since we are being asked, I took my liberty to state my prerence, and my preference is to have the patch submitted to 1) LibreOffice only 2) OOo only 3) both in this order, because 3) increases our workload. I'm making a statement of fact. If stating the fact is somehow unethical, I'll just shut up and go back to handling the workload. * I never said Let's hope OOo don't spot this or OOo will stagnate and die. I hope people will stop putting words into my mouth. This is all from me on this thread. And I really hope you will join us and help us reduce this workload of managing code, Phil. We could use lots of help there. No talk or circular discussion (like this one) will. Have a nice day. Kohei -- Kohei Yoshida, LibreOffice hacker, Calc kyosh...@novell.com -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] Oracle Contributor Agreement and LibreOffice contributions
I think it's inevitable that more and more differences of opinion will arise, so I also believe LO should start their own independent path. Just my 2c, ;-) Jaime On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 16:51, Phil Hibbs sna...@gmail.com wrote: Kohei: That's the wrong assumption I was trying to point out. It's not always applied as-is, and in fact it's rare that patches be accepted as is. Even we don't do that too often. Nonetheless, saying it's better for us if you don't submit your patches to OOo is kind of like saying Lets hope OOo don't spot this bug/issue. It's ethically dubious. If this is the official approach, then why not just make a clean break with OOo and not even try to merge in any future OOo code changes with the LO code? Phil Hibbs. -- -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity *** -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] Oracle Contributor Agreement and LibreOffice contributions
Kohei Yoshida: So, as Michael says, I'm not a big fan of people submitting patches to both projects. And yes, it will create extra work for us but not necessarily for them since we pull their changes but they don't pull ours. That's kind of like saying, lets keep working on our project, but hope that OOo stagnates and doesn't change. Any time OOo changes in an area that LO has patched, you will encounter this kind of problem. If ODF fixes a bug, it's likely that the OOo people will also fix that bug, possibly in a very different way. So, it isn't really making more work, given that this is going to happen anyway, and submitting the bug fix to both projects will simplify things where OOo accept the patch more or less as-is. Which would you prefer, OOo and LO both apply Patch X, or LO applies Patch X and OOo applies Patch Y? Phil Hibbs. -- Don't you just hate self-referential sigs? -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] Oracle Contributor Agreement and LibreOffice contributions
On Fri, 2011-02-18 at 13:48 +, Phil Hibbs wrote: Kohei Yoshida: So, as Michael says, I'm not a big fan of people submitting patches to both projects. And yes, it will create extra work for us but not necessarily for them since we pull their changes but they don't pull ours. That's kind of like saying, lets keep working on our project, but hope that OOo stagnates and doesn't change. Any time OOo changes in an area that LO has patched, you will encounter this kind of problem. If ODF fixes a bug, it's likely that the OOo people will also fix that bug, possibly in a very different way. So, it isn't really making more work, given that this is going to happen anyway, and submitting the bug fix to both projects will simplify things where OOo accept the patch more or less as-is. Which would you prefer, OOo and LO both apply Patch X, or LO applies Patch X and OOo applies Patch Y? Eh, you are saying that, we already have a workload of 100, so having a workload of 101 is not necessarily more work. Is that statement really correct? -- Kohei Yoshida, LibreOffice hacker, Calc kyosh...@novell.com -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] Oracle Contributor Agreement and LibreOffice contributions
Plus, On Fri, 2011-02-18 at 09:26 -0500, Kohei Yoshida wrote: more work, given that this is going to happen anyway, and submitting the bug fix to both projects will simplify things where OOo accept the patch more or less as-is. That's the wrong assumption I was trying to point out. It's not always applied as-is, and in fact it's rare that patches be accepted as is. Even we don't do that too often. The only time a patch is accepted as-is is when the patch is *very* simple (like a one-liner change), or perfect in that it covers all corner cases, fits the taste of the maintainer of that code it patches, and creates no new bugs. Statistically speaking that's a very rare occurrence and my own experience backs it up. Kohei -- Kohei Yoshida, LibreOffice hacker, Calc kyosh...@novell.com -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] Oracle Contributor Agreement and LibreOffice contributions
Hi Michael, *, Michael Meeks wrote (16-02-11 18:36) This question prolly belongs best on the dev list. On Wed, 2011-02-16 at 15:28 +0100, Christophe Strobbe wrote: 1. Now imagine that I contribute code to LibreOffice and the contribution is accepted. Is it then still acceptable (from a copyright point of view) to sign the Oracle Contributor Agreement and submit the same code to OpenOffice.org? Yes - on the other hand, this creates more work for LibreOffice, and (of course) lots of work for you submitting code to OO.o - signing and faxing a form, CWS creation, etc. etc. That's fine of course by me, but when it comes to merging (the inevitably different) changes from OO.o it just makes even more work when we merge that stuff in. So this practise is essentially not recommended. :-) I know that you are very careful preventing that precious developer time is spoiled, which of course is very just. Reading Christophes question though, I see the route that people contribute code both to LibreOffice and OpenOffice.org. It is right that this (which indeed is perfect possible) will give extra work for the people contributing, but I do not see why that should create extra work for LibreOffice, since the code already has been contributed here. Kind regards, Cor 2.b. Can I contribute the code to LibreOffice while the acceptance of my patch to OpenOffice.org is still pending? So - if it is licensed under LGPLv3+/MPL we are happy to accept it - please post it to the dev list, we're eager to see it :-) if Oracle owns the copyright[1], but you can license it to us under LGPLv3+/MPL, I (for one) don't much mind who owns it :-) But again, you consume LibreOffice engineering resource doing merging changes, and our life is easier if you don't do that in most cases :-) ATB, Michael. [1] - and their assignment-cum-license is a pretty thorough way of giving away your rights. -- - giving openoffice.org its foundation :: The Document Foundation - -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] Oracle Contributor Agreement and LibreOffice contributions
Hi, Christophe Strobbe wrote (16-02-11 15:28) I have a question about licences and copyright. [...] These are important questions for developers who don't want to take sides for or against OpenOffice.org or LibreOffice. If this has already been clarified in a wiki somewhere, please let me know. (I have searched the web but I haven't found any info on this.) I think the questions have been answered in detail clear enough and show there is no problem. I want to add that the question also is an interesting one, since some people simply might prefer to contribute to both OpenOffice.org and LibreOffice, since there is still quite some overlap, and code coming from Open to Libre. Of course I know of the other sides of copy right assignments and that therefore people prefer not to share contributions, but it is not something we, IMHO, would want to imply on all developers :-) Kind regards, Cor -- - giving openoffice.org its foundation :: The Document Foundation - -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] Oracle Contributor Agreement and LibreOffice contributions
On Thu, 2011-02-17 at 23:44 +0100, Cor Nouws wrote: Hi Michael, *, Michael Meeks wrote (16-02-11 18:36) This question prolly belongs best on the dev list. On Wed, 2011-02-16 at 15:28 +0100, Christophe Strobbe wrote: 1. Now imagine that I contribute code to LibreOffice and the contribution is accepted. Is it then still acceptable (from a copyright point of view) to sign the Oracle Contributor Agreement and submit the same code to OpenOffice.org? Yes - on the other hand, this creates more work for LibreOffice, and (of course) lots of work for you submitting code to OO.o - signing and faxing a form, CWS creation, etc. etc. That's fine of course by me, but when it comes to merging (the inevitably different) changes from OO.o it just makes even more work when we merge that stuff in. So this practise is essentially not recommended. :-) I know that you are very careful preventing that precious developer time is spoiled, which of course is very just. Reading Christophes question though, I see the route that people contribute code both to LibreOffice and OpenOffice.org. It is right that this (which indeed is perfect possible) will give extra work for the people contributing, but I do not see why that should create extra work for LibreOffice, since the code already has been contributed here. It does create extra work for us. Case in point, there was a fix for the filter performance issue that the reporter reported both to us and to OOo http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=116164 They decided to fix it for 3.3, and I was already working on the same fix right after the reporter reported here. Naturally we ended up solving this differently, merging theirs into ours causes all sorts of conflicts, and resolving that was not trivial. I ended up removing my changes, pull their changes in, removing their changes again (since it caused regression), and re-worked it from scratch. Now, that was slightly different case since it didn't involve a patch. And you might think that, if someone submitted a patch both to our project and OOo project, it shouldn't cause any merging conflict. That's in fact how I interpreted your above statement. But in reality when a patch is being integrated, in most cases the patch does not get integrated as-is; they may do some follow-up changes to cover more cases, and we may do the same. They may make a small follow-up change, or they may entirely re-work the patch and do completely different. Worse, they may make changes in areas that are far removed from the areas where we make changes, in which case merging their changes into ours will not cause conflict, but it will cause issues in run-time behaviors. Discovering that may take months, or sometimes years. So, as Michael says, I'm not a big fan of people submitting patches to both projects. And yes, it will create extra work for us but not necessarily for them since we pull their changes but they don't pull ours. Having said all this, we can't stop people contributing to both projects. It's their choice and it's their basic freedom. But it does create extra work for us, that much is for sure, speaking from experience. Kohei -- Kohei Yoshida, LibreOffice hacker, Calc kyosh...@novell.com -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] Oracle Contributor Agreement and LibreOffice contributions
Hi Kohei, Kohei Yoshida wrote (18-02-11 02:07) On Thu, 2011-02-17 at 23:44 +0100, Cor Nouws wrote: Reading Christophes question though, I see the route that people contribute code both to LibreOffice and OpenOffice.org. It is right that this (which indeed is perfect possible) will give extra work for the people contributing, but I do not see why that should create extra work for LibreOffice, since the code already has been contributed here. It does create extra work for us. Case in point, there was a fix for the filter performance issue that the reporter reported both to us and to OOo http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=116164 They decided to fix it for 3.3, and I was already working on the same fix right after the reporter reported here. Naturally we ended up solving this differently, merging theirs into ours causes all sorts of conflicts, and resolving that was not trivial. I ended up removing my changes, pull their changes in, removing their changes again (since it caused regression), and re-worked it from scratch. Now, that was slightly different case since it didn't involve a patch. And you might think that, if someone submitted a patch both to our project and OOo project, it shouldn't cause any merging conflict. That's in fact how I interpreted your above statement. Correct. But in reality when a patch is being integrated, in most cases the patch does not get integrated as-is; they may do some follow-up changes to cover more cases, and we may do the same. They may make a small follow-up change, or they may entirely re-work the patch and do completely different. Worse, they may make changes in areas that are far removed from the areas where we make changes, in which case merging their changes into ours will not cause conflict, but it will cause issues in run-time behaviors. Discovering that may take months, or sometimes years. So, as Michael says, I'm not a big fan of people submitting patches to both projects. And yes, it will create extra work for us but not necessarily for them since we pull their changes but they don't pull ours. Having said all this, we can't stop people contributing to both projects. It's their choice and it's their basic freedom. But it does create extra work for us, that much is for sure, speaking from experience. Thanks for this extensive answer. Indeed I know the example from i#116164, but did not have the idea that there is a more general considerable risk with patches and changes, apart from the fact that of course pulling from another code base always involves work. But you made the point more clear. Thanks for that. Cor -- - giving openoffice.org its foundation :: The Document Foundation - -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] Oracle Contributor Agreement and LibreOffice contributions
Hi Christophe, On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 3:28 PM, Christophe Strobbe christophe.stro...@esat.kuleuven.be wrote: 1. Now imagine that I contribute code to LibreOffice and the contribution is accepted. Is it then still acceptable (from a copyright point of view) to sign the Oracle Contributor Agreement and submit the same code to OpenOffice.org? Sure - also the other way round is possible, first contribute to OOo and then commit the same code to LO - with the joint copyright assignment you don't loose your own rights, you are free to submit your code under whatever licence terms you please. 2. Conversely, if I sign the Oracle Contributor Agreement and submit code (and it gets accepted, otherwise the copyright reverts to me), You never loose the copyright, you just assign the same rights you have on your code to Oracle as well, additionally. ciao Christian -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] Oracle Contributor Agreement and LibreOffice contributions
Hello Christophe, Le Wed, 16 Feb 2011 15:28:43 +0100, Christophe Strobbe christophe.stro...@esat.kuleuven.be a écrit : Hi, I have a question about licences and copyright. As many of you know, contributing code to the core of OpenOffice.org requires that one signs the Oracle Contributor Agreement [1] (which is identical to the Sun Contributor Agreement). Extensions are exempt from this [2]. So, IANAL, I'm not Oracle, this is not a TDF official statement, don't put your cat in the microwave, etc, etc 1. Now imagine that I contribute code to LibreOffice and the contribution is accepted. Is it then still acceptable (from a copyright point of view) to sign the Oracle Contributor Agreement and submit the same code to OpenOffice.org? Yes. 2. Conversely, if I sign the Oracle Contributor Agreement and submit code (and it gets accepted, otherwise the copyright reverts to me), can I then still submit the same code to LibreOffice or would that cause problems for LibreOffice (because Oracle now shares copyright of the code I submitted)? Yes. Actually that's what we do when we pull the OOo codebase over to us. 2.b. Can I contribute the code to LibreOffice while the acceptance of my patch to OpenOffice.org is still pending? Yes. Best, Charles. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
Re: [tdf-discuss] Oracle Contributor Agreement and LibreOffice contributions
Hi Christophe, This question prolly belongs best on the dev list. On Wed, 2011-02-16 at 15:28 +0100, Christophe Strobbe wrote: 1. Now imagine that I contribute code to LibreOffice and the contribution is accepted. Is it then still acceptable (from a copyright point of view) to sign the Oracle Contributor Agreement and submit the same code to OpenOffice.org? Yes - on the other hand, this creates more work for LibreOffice, and (of course) lots of work for you submitting code to OO.o - signing and faxing a form, CWS creation, etc. etc. That's fine of course by me, but when it comes to merging (the inevitably different) changes from OO.o it just makes even more work when we merge that stuff in. So this practise is essentially not recommended. 2.b. Can I contribute the code to LibreOffice while the acceptance of my patch to OpenOffice.org is still pending? So - if it is licensed under LGPLv3+/MPL we are happy to accept it - please post it to the dev list, we're eager to see it :-) if Oracle owns the copyright[1], but you can license it to us under LGPLv3+/MPL, I (for one) don't much mind who owns it :-) But again, you consume LibreOffice engineering resource doing merging changes, and our life is easier if you don't do that in most cases :-) ATB, Michael. [1] - and their assignment-cum-license is a pretty thorough way of giving away your rights. -- michael.me...@novell.com , Pseudo Engineer, itinerant idiot -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***