Re: [tdf-discuss] Oracle Contributor Agreement and LibreOffice contributions

2011-02-24 Thread Phil Hibbs
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

2011-02-24 Thread Kohei Yoshida
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

2011-02-24 Thread Jaime R. Garza
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

2011-02-18 Thread Phil Hibbs
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

2011-02-18 Thread Kohei Yoshida
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

2011-02-18 Thread Kohei Yoshida
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

2011-02-17 Thread Cor Nouws

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

2011-02-17 Thread Cor Nouws

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

2011-02-17 Thread Kohei Yoshida
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

2011-02-17 Thread Cor Nouws

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

2011-02-16 Thread Christian Lohmaier
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

2011-02-16 Thread Charles-H. Schulz
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

2011-02-16 Thread Michael Meeks
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 ***