M. Fioretti wrote: > What TDF did is basically "we can't tolerate what Sun and then Oracle > did, so we are now finally doing things as they ought to be".
I think that here there is a basic misunderstanding. We have said that we thank Sun and Oracle for what they did so far, but we see a brighter future for OOo under an independent organization. And we would like to see Oracle in the same independent organization as an equal member. Naif. Maybe. I can only speak for myself, but I am still supporting OOo as I have done during the last seven years. I am currently preparing PLIO slides for the upcoming LinuxDay, covering OOo 3.3. I have commented about OOo with journalists, who don't see any conflict of interest if they have to ask questions about OOo, TDF and LibO to the same person (maybe because they know my integrity). Of course, Oracle is free to apply corporate laws to a community, and the community is free to develop an independent judgement based on Oracle's behaviour. We will never issue a negative judgement on Sun and Oracle, and we are ready to sit around a table to discuss how to cooperate during the next decade. It would be nice if our emails - mine was sent on Tuesday in response to my "resignment" decided by an Oracle employee - are answered in due time. -- Italo Vignoli Mobile: +39.348.5653829 - VoIP: +39.02.320621813 Email: italo.vign...@gmail.com - Skype: italovignoli -- E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org for instructions on how to unsubscribe List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/ All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
