On Fri, Jul 6, 2012 at 5:06 PM, Dave Fisher <dave2w...@comcast.net> wrote: > > On Jul 6, 2012, at 1:57 PM, drew wrote: > >> On Fri, 2012-07-06 at 22:22 +0200, hagar.delest wrote: >>>> Message du 06/07/12 14:21 >>>> De : "drew" >>>> *chuckling*...what you think my memory could be faulty - never.. well, >>>> once or twice, maybe. Now what was the question? >>> >>> I think that the question can be closed since the link is now pointing to >>> thte correct page. >>> >>> Perhaps during an operation on the forum recently that link had been >>> reverted to the old Oracle page. >>> >>> Hagar >> >> Hi Hagar, >> >> You mean, I suppose, that the bottom link in the footer of each forum >> (just double checked each) links to: >> http://www.openoffice.org/terms_of_use >> >> I think that is where it should point, and that is the page in need of >> update. > > Would someone please JFDI? There have been 100 emails on this topic on > ooo-dev and ooo-private. >
I think that is an argument against JFDI, not for it. > If you are afraid it will be rejected then do a terms_of_use2 and then get > feedback. > If you think something will be rejected then you should make a lazy consensus proposal first. JFDI is for non-controversial changes. > Between Dennis and Rob there is certainly some middle ground. > Not really relevant. Other views have been raised that agree with neither Dennis nor me. So portraying our views as being the extremes within which we should seek middle ground is inaccurate and divisive. If you have a proposal to make, then make it, but without the editorial commentary, please. -Rob > THANKS! > Dave > > >> >> Another option would be, perhaps, to point to this page >> http://www.openoffice.org/license.html instead - doesn't seem quite >> right though. >> >> //drew >> >> >> >> >
