Thank you for clearing that up.
Peter aka floris v
Op 16-11-2011 22:23, Ariel Constenla-Haile schreef:
Hello Floris,
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 10:03:13PM +0100, floris v wrote:
There's apparently an effort to discard hunspell because of a
license issue.
there is no issue with the Hunspell libraries (libhunspell, libhyphen,
libmythes), see http://s.apache.org/5Du
The issue is with the dictionaries, their license status is very hard to
specify: in some cases, the original authors hold some license, the
people that made later modifications/improvement other license; there is
a case where the authors signed the SCA but this is only valid for their
addenda, not for the original work (but how con you separate both?),
etc. etc. etc. I started analyzing the license status but gave up:
http://people.apache.org/~arielch/dictionaries.ods
Now hunspell is used widely and has been much
improved as compared with ispell and aspell.
http://www.opentaal.org/software-issues - a part of the Dutch "open
language foundation" website is explained how much effort - and even
money - went into improving hunspell. I wonder if the developers
will improve aspell or ispell to include those additions so that the
efforts of hunspell based dictionary builders won't be in vain as
far as OOo is concerned.
The Hunspell functionality won't change at all, there is no license
issue with the three Hunspell libraries, so AOOo will still use then.
And dictionaries are extensions, dictionary extension developers can
continue their work, AOOo user will be able to download and install
their dictionaries as usual (nothing will change in this aspect); the
problem is if dictionary extension can be *included* in an AOOo release.
Regards
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: ooo-users-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: ooo-users-h...@incubator.apache.org
