If they are considering pulling the plug on the OOo line they would be
on our side. I think its worth a shot in my honest opinion.
On 01/13/2011 01:19 PM, Charles-H. Schulz wrote:
Hey Jonathan,
1) Sigrid is right, we would need to ask for Oracle to relicense.
2) The new, non-Oracle patches are however licensed under a dual (L)GPL
v3 + (note the + which allows us to upgrade) and MPL + as we found we
had several code lines written under that license inside the existing
OOo code.
3) would Oracle object to it? I'm not Oracle and can't speak for them,
but I don't think they're our best friends for life... :-) More
seriously, why would they want to help us ?
Best,
Charles.
Le Thu, 13 Jan 2011 11:51:52 +0100,
Jonathan Aquilina<eagles051...@gmail.com> a écrit :
In all honesty would they object to it?
On 1/13/11 11:46 AM, Sigrid Carrera wrote:
Hi,
2011/1/13 Jonathan Aquilina<eagles051...@gmail.com>:
You would still need permission even though its a fork of the
original code?
yes, since the original contributors agreed to use a specific
license. This cannot changed without consent from those people.
Sigrid
--
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 ***
