2011/11/7 Rob Weir <robw...@apache.org>

>
> We can do three things for an Apache release:
>
> 1) We can release source code tarballs, with only Apache 2.0 and
> compatible source.  Someone would then be free to take this source and
> build it themselves, including code from other licenses as they wish.
> They could then use and redistribute that compiled version according
> to the licenses for the code it includes.  This is the minimum that an
> Apache release requires -- a source release.
>
> 2) We can provide binary releases.  This can include "weak copyleft"
> code like MPL or EPL license.  But they cannot include LPGL/GPL.
>
> 3) We can link to (but not host) 3rd party builds and distributions
> based on our source code releases.  These 3rd party builds could
> include GPL/LPGL items.  If you look at a typically Apache project,
> like Subversion, you see a large number of links to externally hosted
> binaries, for platform ports as well as enhanced versions:
> http://subversion.apache.org/packages.html
>
> -Rob
>
>
> > Regards,
> >
> > Gianluca
> >
> > --
> > Lettura gratuita o acquisto di libri e racconti di fantascienza,
> > fantasy, horror, noir, narrativa fantastica e tradizionale:
> > http://www.letturefantastiche.com/
> >
> >
>

Please, correct me if I'm wrong but AFAIK only a few dictionaries were ever
bundled on OOo releases: for most of the localizations the build was
without any useful dictionary for the NL speaker and the user was in the
need to download and install the dictionaries by him/herself.
And at least the Spanish dictionary included on the releases was really
close to something useless (outdated spell check, no thesaurus, no
hyphenation patters).
At this point, IMHO, the best "solution" will be to deliver an Apache
binary *without* dictionaries and put on the download page a huge button:

|Download dictionaries   |
|(External site)              |

A clear note telling users something like:

"OOo releases do not include dictionaries because of license problems, you
will need to download them separately"

will be enough, I think. As a matter of fact it is not a new situation.
Just my 2¢

Cheers
Ricardo

Reply via email to