The ASF accepts contributions from anyone. You don't have to be "part" of the ASF to contribute. The ASF is a meritocracy, and so the more you do, the more you *can* do, and providing bug fixes, patches, documentation, translations are all welcome and needed contributions (as with all FOSS projects).
As far as the 'Oracle won't make new licensing agreements', I am not an Oracle person, but that is the clear indication they have given me, and one will I have little doubt they mean. On that last point, btw, LOo/TDF and others (including I think IBM, although I know that there have been bad history and bad blood there) are to be commended because it was the pressure that you all provided that finally encouraged Oracle to release the s/w. That is *not* easy. When Oracle digs in their heels, they dig in deep (does Larry wear stilettos?). The fact that it wasn't a revenue source for them certainly made it easier, but a victory is a victory. Enjoy the rare one rather than look for next one ;) Cheers! On Jun 4, 2011, at 8:23 PM, Laurence Jeloudev wrote: > So oracle won't make new licensing agreements with any one else except > apache which could see no contribution to the project unless your part > of ASF. > > > Laurence > > > On 05/06/2011, at 10:11, Jim Jagielski <j...@jagunet.com> wrote: > >> >> On Jun 4, 2011, at 7:35 PM, Christian Lohmaier wrote: >> >>> Man, how I love fullquotes :-/ >>> >>> On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 1:20 AM, Laurence Jeloudev <ljelou...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>>> Make a new license agreement for openoffice? With other contributing >>>> companies. >>> >>> Sorry, but what is your point? >>> my point was that it is in my opionon a stupid idea for LO people to >>> sign up as contributors to the incubator proposal just "to have a say" >>> or "now there are no restrictions yet". >>> >>> Once in Apache, there is no discussion about licences anymore. Apache >>> only has its own license and has made it pretty clear numerous times >>> that they won't allow other licenses. >>> >>> Only Oracle could add another license to the mix, but if everyone >>> subscribes to the apache-proposal, and thus shows their support for >>> the apache license, why should Oracle even consider to re-license? >>> >>> So I absolutely don't udnerstand what you're trying to say, especially >>> when you write it as a f'up to my posting. >>> >> >> If the reason to not "join" Apache is because you are holding >> out hope that Oracle may still one day re-license, then I think >> you are holding out for a lost, lost hope. >> >> Whether OOo lives or dies in Apache, Oracle has made it abundantly >> clear that this is it... This is one promise I fully expect Oracle >> will keep :/ >> >> >> -- >> Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org >> Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette >> List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ >> All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be >> deleted >> > > -- > Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org > Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette > List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ > All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted > -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
