Chad:
You seem to be trying to either beat a dead horse or resurrect one.
The projects are different and are using different licenses. Apple
itself, like other companies use aspects of free BSD and other open
source programs and these and similarly modified programs are part of
Darwin and noted as such with special licenses. Sun supports Open
Office; Apple supports Quicktime, and so on.
What is your point?
It is almost as though your complaining that Hagen Daz ice cream isn't
the same as Ben & Jerry's and it's idiotic to have more than one kind
of ice cream. Or is your argument that everyone work for free on one
project -- one product?
Reading what you've written has confused me; what are you complaining
about? Why does the distinction you are making matter? Why is it
important? And why are you working so hard to convince everyone you
are right, when many reasonable persons have presented cogent
explanations patiently explaining why you are wrong?
It is one thing to complain that one doesn't appreciate the legal
commitments and agreements of the various licenses in place and in use.
It is quite another to complain for the mere sake of complaining and
present no better resolution to these commonly accepted practices.
If you have a different approach you've worked at, explain it. If you
are pushing to present and support with cash your own project -- then
say so and explain how your project is better and more beneficial.
You of course, are perfectly welcome to begin and support your own
project and demonstrate the workability and superiority of your
concepts. However, I have not yet read anything you wrote which
describes anything along those lines. However, you seem to be
extremely upset that the different projects NeoOffice, Open Office,
Star Office and others are successful in so far as they function and
exist, as they each satisfy or address different needs and different
people. Not perfectly perhaps, but each of these projects, and many
others have their fans.
Are you dedicating your life to argue with all these people, until you
convert everyone to Chad's Way? Or is there a reasonable point of view
somewhere superior and more efficient than what exists, if so -- what
is it? When and how do you intend to demonstrate it? Mention where
the website is, present a link to it and let everyone else get along
with their respective interests regarding Open Office, be done with it
and move on.
On Feb 19, 2006, at 5:44 PM, Chad Smith wrote:
On 2/19/06, Ross Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
If that's the case, then NeoOffice are free to take from OOo but,
effectively, OOo can't take from Neo.
Which is why it's stupid to have 2 projects - if everyone just worked
on
NeoOffice, there wouldn't be a need for "OOo to take from Neo" - since
Neo
would be the only version of OOo for Mac. The LGPL allows Sun (and
others)
to make comerical versions of OOo without publishing the source.
Since Sun
has no interest in making a Mac version of StarOffice (since they
haven't
made one since they bought StarOffice however many years ago) they
shouldn't
have a problem with their not being an "official" LGPL'ed OOo for Mac.
--
- Chad Smith
http://www.gimpshop.net/
Because everyone loves free software!
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
