Well, the intent for AOOo from the very beginning was to provide an ALv2 licensed version of the OOo codebase for *all* codebases in the OOo ecosystem to be able to consume. The very fact that LO and TDF are also implying that this makes sense by admitting that they will be AOOo consumers is nice.
Of course, doing all that while at the same time trying to also "deride" the Apache license puts them in that precarious position where they have to try to have their cake and eat it too. But be that as it may, the fact is that AOOo is succeeding in being the common core of the OOo ecosystem, which was one of the goals from the very beginning. LO and TDF are simply trying to spin things so that this success of AOOo is minimized, while at the same time taking advantage of the success. If they want their fork to be under some other license, so what? That's the beauty of the ALv2. On May 23, 2012, at 3:58 PM, Donald Whytock wrote: > Um, guys? As this concerns a LibreOffice webpage over which the AOO > committers largely have no control, is it better to have this argument > here or on a LibreOffice-related list? > > Don >
