On 07.06.2011 14:22, Mathias Bauer wrote:
On 07.06.2011 13:00, Nóirín Plunkett wrote:
On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 11:30 AM, Mathias Bauermathias_ba...@gmx.net
wrote:
If there was still too much concern about that, I could work on an
improved
list from a technical perspective and provide this list
On 08.06.2011 00:37, robert_w...@us.ibm.com wrote:
Greg Steingst...@gmail.com wrote on 06/07/2011 05:50:49 PM:
Besides the content Oracle owns, it seems we could just ask the other
owners
to give the CWS's to the ASF. I mean, really... *somebody* out there
holds
the copyright. We just
On 06/07/2011 06:08 PM, Andrew Rist wrote:
It is Oracle's intent to provide to ASF the files needed to build OOo,
taking into account licensing and ownership issues.
This includes binary artifacts such as the OOo artwork and translation
databases. I am following the discussions here closely,
and
On Wed, Jun 8, 2011 at 6:53 AM, Steve Loughran ste...@apache.org wrote:
Now, the database with OOo is hsqldb, Java based, so assuming we want to run
this on Apache Harmony, does the Java TCK becomes a test dependency of OOo?
No
- Sam Ruby
Project Lead since 2005) I'm happy to
see Oracle finally answering questions on public lists.
May I ask for a last clarification on the code covered by the Oracle
grant? Some observers, like the Document Foundation [1] and Bradley Kuhn
[2], seem to imply that the grant will also turn some proprietary
.
(acknowledged - that was several hundred messages ago)
On 6/8/2011 1:41 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
May I ask for a last clarification on the code covered by the Oracle
grant? Some observers, like the Document Foundation [1] and Bradley Kuhn
[2], seem to imply that the grant will also turn some proprietary
Andrew Rist wrote:
I'll quote my earlier answer [1] on that:
Our approach is to start with the main open source code - stuff with
clear provenance. The OOo extensions are more complex in terms of
licensing and other issues, but this is certainly something to revisit
at a later stage of the
Hi,
Le 7 juin 11 à 06:01, Ralph Goers a écrit :
It is my expectation that if we make reasonable requests and that if
those requests are within Oracle's power to fulfill those requests,
that we will obtain subsequent software grants.
Sam, for me this is the only area where I question whether
Ralph Goers schreef:
On Jun 6, 2011, at 7:27 AM, Sam Ruby wrote:
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 10:02 AM, Christian Lippka c...@lippka.com wrote:
While the technical analyze here seems (should not use that word)
correct my
understanding is that missing bits could still be provided if
requested.
Simon Brouwer wrote:
The real question is whether anything essential is missing that Oracle
can't supply and that is very difficult to replace.
If you re-read Christian's mail, the answer to both is yes. And
another remark: given the overall state of the code (~20 years of
sedimentation), the
Hi Thorsten,
Am 07.06.2011 11:09, schrieb Thorsten Behrens:
Simon Brouwer wrote:
The real question is whether anything essential is missing that Oracle
can't supply and that is very difficult to replace.
If you re-read Christian's mail, the answer to both is yes. And
another remark: given
Hi Thorsten,
Thorsten Behrens schreef:
Simon Brouwer wrote:
The real question is whether anything essential is missing that Oracle
can't supply and that is very difficult to replace.
If you re-read Christian's mail, the answer to both is yes.
Both? That was only one question, and
On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 12:01 AM, Ralph Goers ralph.go...@dslextreme.com wrote:
On Jun 6, 2011, at 7:27 AM, Sam Ruby wrote:
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 10:02 AM, Christian Lippka c...@lippka.com wrote:
While the technical analyze here seems (should not use that word) correct my
understanding is
Mathias Bauer wrote:
I don't think that this is really necessary *now*, as we can do that
even better and more efficiently when we actually work on the code
from the svn repository. It was promised that the needed files will
be provided once they are known. I'm confident that this will work
On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 11:30 AM, Mathias Bauer mathias_ba...@gmx.net wrote:
If there was still too much concern about that, I could work on an improved
list from a technical perspective and provide this list in a few days. I
don't claim to reach perfection, but the result should be much closer
On 7 Jun 2011, at 13:06, Michael Stahl wrote:
On 07/06/11 11:42, Christian Lippka wrote:
Am 07.06.2011 11:09, schrieb Thorsten Behrens:
If you re-read Christian's mail, the answer to both is yes. And
another remark: given the overall state of the code (~20 years of
sedimentation), the full
On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 12:52 PM, Mathias Bauer mathias_ba...@gmx.netwrote:
On 07.06.2011 12:37, Thorsten Behrens wrote:
Mathias Bauer wrote:
I don't think that this is really necessary *now*, as we can do that
even better and more efficiently when we actually work on the code
from the svn
On 07.06.2011 13:00, Nóirín Plunkett wrote:
On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 11:30 AM, Mathias Bauermathias_ba...@gmx.net wrote:
If there was still too much concern about that, I could work on an improved
list from a technical perspective and provide this list in a few days. I
don't claim to reach
On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 8:00 AM, Simon Phipps si...@webmink.com wrote:
It seems entirely reasonable, though, to expect Oracle
to provide a firm commitment that they will relicense any and all files in
the repository that they own, including CWS. Sam, does the current
commitment from Apache
It is Oracle's intent to provide to ASF the files needed to build OOo,
taking into account licensing and ownership issues.
This includes binary artifacts such as the OOo artwork and translation
databases. I am following the discussions here closely,
and I am collected all of the lists that are
That's very helpful, thanks Andrew. Will Oracle also be providing the
work-in-progress CWS[1] please?
Thanks
S.
[1] http://dl.dropbox.com/u/1792694/cws.ods
On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 6:08 PM, Andrew Rist andrew.r...@oracle.com wrote:
It is Oracle's intent to provide to ASF the files needed to
We are trying to provide all of the Oracle owned content in the OOo
repositories.
A.
On 6/7/2011 10:14 AM, Simon Phipps wrote:
That's very helpful, thanks Andrew. Will Oracle also be providing the
work-in-progress CWS[1] please?
Thanks
S.
[1] http://dl.dropbox.com/u/1792694/cws.ods
On
Good to know, many thanks.
S.
On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 7:23 PM, Andrew Rist andrew.r...@oracle.com wrote:
We are trying to provide all of the Oracle owned content in the OOo
repositories.
A.
On 6/7/2011 10:14 AM, Simon Phipps wrote:
That's very helpful, thanks Andrew. Will Oracle also
Besides the content Oracle owns, it seems we could just ask the other owners
to give the CWS's to the ASF. I mean, really... *somebody* out there holds
the copyright. We just have to determine who, and then ask. Some definite
legwork, but it seems doable.
On Jun 7, 2011 10:15 AM, Simon Phipps
Greg Stein gst...@gmail.com wrote on 06/07/2011 05:50:49 PM:
Besides the content Oracle owns, it seems we could just ask the other
owners
to give the CWS's to the ASF. I mean, really... *somebody* out there
holds
the copyright. We just have to determine who, and then ask. Some
definite
On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 11:37 PM, robert_w...@us.ibm.com wrote:
Greg Stein gst...@gmail.com wrote on 06/07/2011 05:50:49 PM:
Besides the content Oracle owns, it seems we could just ask the other
owners
to give the CWS's to the ASF. I mean, really... *somebody* out there
holds
the
Forwarding as requested.
- Sam Ruby
-- Forwarded message --
From: Christian Lohmaier lohmaier+ooofut...@googlemail.com
Date: Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 5:45 AM
Subject: [tdf-discuss] Code covered by the Oracle grant (was: Proposal
to join Apache OpenOffice)
To: disc
Am 06.06.2011 12:02, schrieb Christian Lohmaier
[...]
- Sam Ruby
raw numbers:
wc -l repo.lst sorted_ooo.lst
69076 repo.lst
39616 sorted_ooo.lst
So even calling this seems to include the full repo and that even
twice is either with malicious intent, or with no clue. Christian
Lippka
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 10:02 AM, Christian Lippka c...@lippka.com wrote:
While the technical analyze here seems (should not use that word) correct my
understanding is that missing bits could still be provided if requested. But
this must be answered by people who are making the negotiations.
On Jun 6, 2011, at 7:27 AM, Sam Ruby wrote:
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 10:02 AM, Christian Lippka c...@lippka.com wrote:
While the technical analyze here seems (should not use that word) correct my
understanding is that missing bits could still be provided if requested. But
this must be
30 matches
Mail list logo
