[steering-discuss] Re: OpenOffice and the ASF
On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 6:39 AM, Florian Effenberger flo...@documentfoundation.org wrote: Hello, I hope you don't mind if I jump in to the discussion. The views shared here are not any official TDF statement, but rather solely my own ones, acting as a volunteer who has been contributing to the OpenOffice.org project, and now the LibreOffice project, since 2004, investing lots of my private time and heart into the community. My hope is that you've appreciated the ample welcome that was provided for your input at on the ASF mailing lists. It has been suggested that we return the favor. I don't have a lot to say, but I will be watching this list and will respond to questions. While this too is not an official ASF statement, as VP of Legal Affairs for the ASF, I do have a particular focus on license issues. With that in mind: To bring this to an end: I seriously doubt that having a separate project, even as incubator, within the Apache Foundation, would bring benefit for anyone. The Document Foundation has been working for months not only on shaping a project, but also on shaping solid grounds to work on, providing the legal framework, and our open, meritocratic and transparent approach ensures that anyone -- individuals, organizations and businesses -- can contribute to the future. I do believe that a choice in license affects this statement. To be clear there is no license that satisfies the above statement. Nor am I going to ask anyone to change their choice in licenses. However I will state that in cases where widespread use of the code is vital for advancing the cause of free software that the Apache License, Version 2.0 is an appropriate choice: http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-recommendations.html - Sam Ruby -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[steering-discuss] Re: [Libreoffice] Hello! ... and lurking :-)
On Fri, Jun 3, 2011 at 7:15 PM, Greg Stein gst...@gmail.com wrote: Hi all, If you have any comments, questions, or concerns, then please feel free to direct them my way (on whatever list). I'm here to listen and understand, and to offer up answers where I can. I have a question: Why would Apache contemplate helping IBM pull a Jenkins/Hudson on us, fragmenting the license of a project that has been with a uniform licensing so far ? (Oracle could merge our changes... they elected _not_ to do so because they wanted a Copyright assignment on top of the code, but that was not a licensing incompatibility) You (Apache) are lending your good name to a nasty endeavor, for the benefit of a company that has an history of screwing you over (Harmony ?) Ironically what seems to be happening at Apache is very reminiscent to me to the ISO/MSXML debacle... Some corporation exploiting the letter of your governance to better abuse the spirit of it. (that is _if_ I understand what Apache stand for... but maybe I'm misguided) Norbert PS: I strongly encourage you to read: http://www.itworld.com/software/170521/big-winner-apache-openofficeorg#comment-9942111 That shed a very illuminating light on IBM's involvement in OOo, and why it is hard to take seriously their grandiose promises... that would by far not been the first time, and there is no reason to believe that the outcome will be any different this time around... except that both the OpenOffice brand and the Apache reputation will be tarnished in the process... -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [tdf-discuss] Oracle contributes OOo Code to Apache Software Foundation's Incubator
2011/6/3 Cor Nouws oo...@nouenoff.nl Gianluca Turconi wrote (02-06-11 09:48) And IBM will *directly *contribute to the Apache new project! See: http://www-03.ibm.com/press/us/en/pressrelease/34638.wss All it says: . As part of today's news, IBM will contribute staff resources to collaborate with the Apache community during the project's incubation period to further the Open Document Format standard. Great joy ? Well, it's more than what IBM had previously stated, that was *nothing*. :-) I'm not a fan of *two* communities and *two *foundations that work on a more or less modified OOo code base. However, having all Oracle OOo assets under the ownership (or other transient agreement) of another open source foundation, it's better than let a brand like OpenOffice.org die in Oracle copyright/brands portfolio. Regards, Gianluca -- Lettura gratuita o acquisto di libri e racconti di fantascienza, fantasy, horror, noir, narrativa fantastica e tradizionale: http://www.letturefantastiche.com/ -- 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
[tdf-discuss] Re: Oracle contributes OOo Code to Apache Software Foundation's Incubator
As a user I wouldn't be happy IF the devs split up between two projects. The way I see it is IBM and maybe some Oracle devs will work on OOo and everybody else will work on LO... The good part (besides the Apache license which allows LO to use what little code will be openly contributed to OOo) is that IBM will continue to develop ODF, which badly needs it. I find it a little absurd that the people behind a file format that has been under development for years haven't implemented font embedding... Of course, fonts are not important for serious business companies :) -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Oracle-contributes-OOo-Code-to-Apache-Software-Foundation-s-Incubator-tp3011527p3018856.html Sent from the Discuss mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- 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
[tdf-discuss] Re: Oracle contributes OOo Code to Apache Software Foundation'sIncubator
plino pedl...@gmail.com wrote in message news:1307086982610-3018856.p...@n3.nabble.com... As a user I wouldn't be happy IF the devs split up between two projects. The way I see it is IBM and maybe some Oracle devs will work on OOo and everybody else will work on LO... The good part (besides the Apache license which allows LO to use what little code will be openly contributed to OOo) is that IBM will continue to develop ODF, which badly needs it. I find it a little absurd that the people behind a file format that has been under development for years haven't implemented font embedding... Of course, fonts are not important for serious business companies :) -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Oracle-contributes-OOo-Code-to-Apache-Software-Foundation-s-Incubator-tp3011527p3018856.html Sent from the Discuss mailing list archive at Nabble.com. The LO folk left the OOo group because OOo was, in their opinion, going to be over-controlled (by Oracle). Now that this is no longer true, the LO folk don't have a case and should return to the fold. So, why don't the LO folk do a deal with Apache, combine the best bits of OOo with LO to get back to a single product and form jointly with the Apache folk an LO Foundation. It seems completely crazy to have two sets of developers and two sets of code. All that does is sow FUD (Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt) in the minds of potential users. Oh, and by the way, get rid of the asinine name LibreOffice which half the world can't pronounce and which three quarters of the world doesn't understand the meaning of. -- Harold Fuchs London, England -- 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
Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Oracle contributes OOo Code to Apache Software Foundation'sIncubator
Competition breads competence. Let there be two groups, two paths, two products. In fact, I hope that the groups co-exist but go on completely separate management styles and feature direction. The fact that it might potentially lead to two in-compatible code-bases or at the very least, not a very clean future base for cross-pollination doesn't affect my opinion. OpenOffice is not the linux kernel. Let there be fire, everywhere. On Fri, Jun 3, 2011 at 5:30 PM, Harold Fuchs hwfa.libreoff...@gmail.com wrote: plino pedl...@gmail.com wrote in message news:1307086982610-3018856.p...@n3.nabble.com... As a user I wouldn't be happy IF the devs split up between two projects. The way I see it is IBM and maybe some Oracle devs will work on OOo and everybody else will work on LO... The good part (besides the Apache license which allows LO to use what little code will be openly contributed to OOo) is that IBM will continue to develop ODF, which badly needs it. I find it a little absurd that the people behind a file format that has been under development for years haven't implemented font embedding... Of course, fonts are not important for serious business companies :) -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Oracle-contributes-OOo-Code-to-Apache-Software-Foundation-s-Incubator-tp3011527p3018856.html Sent from the Discuss mailing list archive at Nabble.com. The LO folk left the OOo group because OOo was, in their opinion, going to be over-controlled (by Oracle). Now that this is no longer true, the LO folk don't have a case and should return to the fold. So, why don't the LO folk do a deal with Apache, combine the best bits of OOo with LO to get back to a single product and form jointly with the Apache folk an LO Foundation. It seems completely crazy to have two sets of developers and two sets of code. All that does is sow FUD (Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt) in the minds of potential users. Oh, and by the way, get rid of the asinine name LibreOffice which half the world can't pronounce and which three quarters of the world doesn't understand the meaning of. -- Harold Fuchs London, England -- 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
Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Oracle contributes OOo Code to Apache Software Foundation'sIncubator
On 6/3/11, Harold Fuchs hwfa.libreoff...@gmail.com wrote: ... The LO folk left the OOo group because OOo was, in their opinion, going to be over-controlled (by Oracle). Now that this is no longer true, the LO folk don't have a case and should return to the fold. ... Nonsense. Oh, and by the way, get rid of the asinine name LibreOffice which half the world can't pronounce and which three quarters of the world doesn't understand the meaning of. More nonsense. -- 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
Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Oracle contributes OOo Code to Apache Software Foundation'sIncubator
To: discuss@documentfoundation.org From: Harold Fuchs hwfa.libreoff...@gmail.com Subject: [tdf-discuss] Re: Oracle contributes OOo Code to Apache Software Foundation'sIncubator Date: Fri, 3 Jun 2011 10:30:55 +0100 Lines: 44 Message-ID: isa9ko$p1i$1...@dough.gmane.org References: is5oge$u73$1...@dough.gmane.orgBANLkTimkfoDkoB5X9R6xfU=08pavg51...@mail.gmail.com4de877cb.4010...@nouenoff.nlbanlktingjandp8snbesxxaewjcz3wqp...@mail.gmail.com 1307086982610-3018856.p...@n3.nabble.com X-Complaints-To: use...@dough.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: wolfeden.demon.co.uk X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5931 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.6090 Archived-At: http://go.mail-archive.com/v2Te-OvK-n2AXfcaH1TnsB07g60= Reply-To: discuss@documentfoundation.org Errors-To: postmas...@documentfoundation.org Precedence: list List-Id: discuss.documentfoundation.org List-Unsubscribe: mailto:discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org List-Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ List-Post: mailto:discuss@documentfoundation.org List-Help: mailto:discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org List-Subscribe: mailto:discuss+subscr...@documentfoundation.org List-Owner: mailto:postmas...@documentfoundation.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=iso-8859-1; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable plino pedl...@gmail.com wrote in message = news:1307086982610-3018856.p...@n3.nabble.com... As a user I wouldn't be happy IF the devs split up between two projects. The way I see it is IBM and maybe some Oracle devs will work on OOo and everybody else will work on LO... The good part (besides the Apache license which allows LO to use what = little code will be openly contributed to OOo) is that IBM will continue to = develop ODF, which badly needs it. I find it a little absurd that the people behind a file format that has = been under development for years haven't implemented font embedding... Of = course, fonts are not important for serious business companies :) -- View this message in context: = http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Oracle-contributes-OOo-Code-to-Apach= e-Software-Foundation-s-Incubator-tp3011527p3018856.html Sent from the Discuss mailing list archive at Nabble.com. The LO folk left the OOo group because OOo was, in their opinion, going to = be over-controlled (by Oracle). Now that this is no longer true, the LO fol= k = don't have a case and should return to the fold. So, why don't the LO folk = do a deal with Apache, combine the best bits of OOo with LO to get back to = a = single product and form jointly with the Apache folk an LO Foundation. = It seems completely crazy to have two sets of developers and two sets of = code. All that does is sow FUD (Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt) in the minds o= f = potential users. This is bizarre; there is strength in competition. The beauty of gnu/linux is the variety in distributions; the world is big enough for OO and LO and many others to adopt the DF ODF standard. Oh, and by the way, get rid of the asinine name LibreOffice which half th= e = world can't pronounce and which three quarters of the world doesn't = understand the meaning of. This seems a ludicrous statement to make. Perhaps you should learn another language, especially living in probably the most linguistically diverse city in the world. -- 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
Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Oracle contributes OOo Code to Apache Software Foundation'sIncubator
I just signed up as a committer on the Apache incubator this morning. Why? Am I against LO and TDF - no, at heart I'm a copyleft person, however, there are also practical realities to consider too sometimes. What is the worst case? OOo code and trademark go with Apache and then little is done. LO and TDF can carry on business as usual. Best case scenario (depending on what you view as good or bad :-) ) IBM and others put in engineering effort and the OOo code base improves. TDF take and improve that code and release it with a copyleft license. TDF engineers cooperate with OOo engineers to ensure that as far as possible both sets of code remain manageable. Ok, there is a threat that developers from the TDF camp migrate to the OOo camp. But really there is not much choice than to take that risk. It will depend on how many really want only to work on copyleft code. The not possible scenario which we might have liked better is Oracle donate everything to TDF - but they didn't and they won't so it's a case of if my aunt had balls she would be my uncle. She hasn't so she isn't. :-) One thing that is very clear is that if TDF had not been formed Oracle would not transferred things to Apache, at least not this soon. So brilliant you guys, you took a risk and it has at least mostly worked if not perfectly. Better now to look for the opportunities rather than the threats when really there is not much that can be done about them. Pack out the committers list on Apache and make sure you have a say in the governance of OOo as well as TDF and LO. -- Ian Ofqual Accredited IT Qualifications The Schools ITQ www.theINGOTs.org +44 (0)1827 305940 You have received this email from the following company: The Learning Machine Limited, Reg Office, 36 Ashby Road, Tamworth, Staffordshire, B79 8AQ. Reg No: 05560797, Registered in England and Wales. -- 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
Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Oracle contributes OOo Code to Apache Software Foundation'sIncubator
Hi Augustine, *, Augustine Souza schrieb: On 6/3/11, Harold Fuchs hwfa.libreoff...@gmail.com wrote: ... [.. nonsense ..] Nonsense. [.. nonsense ..] More nonsense. Thanks :o)) SCNR Gruß/regards -- Friedrich Libreoffice-Box http://libreofficebox.org/ LibreOffice and more on CD/DVD images -- 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
Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Oracle contributes OOo Code to Apache Software Foundation'sIncubator
Delivering sermons to LibreOffice after being humbled by the same community which you and some corporates didn't even bothered to even hear out, I am sure you know that OOo has not been accepted as an Apache project yet. So stop lecturing what we should do , anywayz you guys won't even know when the Big Daddy changes his mood and you guys are left chewing words. As for aspersions regarding the name, I am sure that you know that most of the Linux distros which power 90% of world's linux machines have already accepted LO and you guys can go ahead and curse the BIG Daddy ... Thank You Best Regards Varun Mittal http://www.varunmittal.info/ https://www.google.com/profiles/varunmittal87 Google https://www.google.com/profiles/varunmittal87 Facebookhttp://www.facebook.com/mittal.varun LinkedIn http://www.linkedin.com/in/varunmittal87 Twitterhttp://twitter.com/varunmittal19 Uncertainty is the only Certainty of LIFE On Fri, Jun 3, 2011 at 5:30 PM, Harold Fuchs hwfa.libreoff...@gmail.comwrote: plino pedl...@gmail.com wrote in message news:1307086982610-3018856.p...@n3.nabble.com... As a user I wouldn't be happy IF the devs split up between two projects. The way I see it is IBM and maybe some Oracle devs will work on OOo and everybody else will work on LO... The good part (besides the Apache license which allows LO to use what little code will be openly contributed to OOo) is that IBM will continue to develop ODF, which badly needs it. I find it a little absurd that the people behind a file format that has been under development for years haven't implemented font embedding... Of course, fonts are not important for serious business companies :) -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Oracle-contributes-OOo-Code-to-Apache-Software-Foundation-s-Incubator-tp3011527p3018856.html Sent from the Discuss mailing list archive at Nabble.com. The LO folk left the OOo group because OOo was, in their opinion, going to be over-controlled (by Oracle). Now that this is no longer true, the LO folk don't have a case and should return to the fold. So, why don't the LO folk do a deal with Apache, combine the best bits of OOo with LO to get back to a single product and form jointly with the Apache folk an LO Foundation. It seems completely crazy to have two sets of developers and two sets of code. All that does is sow FUD (Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt) in the minds of potential users. Oh, and by the way, get rid of the asinine name LibreOffice which half the world can't pronounce and which three quarters of the world doesn't understand the meaning of. -- Harold Fuchs London, England -- 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
RE: [tdf-discuss] Re: Oracle contributes OOo Code to Apache SoftwareFoundation'sIncubator
-Original Message- From: Xing Li [mailto:x...@fictionpress.com] Sent: Friday, June 03, 2011 11:48 AM To: discuss@documentfoundation.org Subject: Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Oracle contributes OOo Code to Apache SoftwareFoundation'sIncubator Competition breads competence. Let there be two groups, two paths, two products. And lets continue to discuss and exchange silly arguments for so trivial bugs like this https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=31005 never get fixed :( Disclaimer: This comment by no means is intended to discredit the LibreOffice developers. On the contrary, I think they have done a tremendous job in the past half year taking responsability for the continuation of the OO work and publish new releases. My major concern is that the community has sufficient critical mass in terms of serious developers to let a good open office product survive. That imho needs good working relationships with ASF. -- 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
Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Oracle contributes OOo Code to Apache SoftwareFoundation'sIncubator
Hi all, Pieter, On 03/06/2011 14:54, Pieter E. Zanstra wrote: -Original Message- From: Xing Li [mailto:x...@fictionpress.com] Sent: Friday, June 03, 2011 11:48 AM To: discuss@documentfoundation.org Subject: Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Oracle contributes OOo Code to Apache SoftwareFoundation'sIncubator Competition breads competence. Let there be two groups, two paths, two products. And lets continue to discuss and exchange silly arguments for so trivial bugs like this https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=31005 never get fixed :( Disclaimer: This comment by no means is intended to discredit the LibreOffice developers. On the contrary, I think they have done a tremendous job in the past half year taking responsability for the continuation of the OO work and publish new releases. My major concern is that the community has sufficient critical mass in terms of serious developers to let a good open office product survive. That imho needs good working relationships with ASF. Relationships need time, listening, observing, thinking, building, exchanging, trusting, creating, . all that imho should be contained in 'a little patience and concentration' :) The announcement is so young, may be we should not conclude before it matures a bit. That doesn't prevent discussion of course, but no conclusion yet. Now to your bug Pieter, you're sad because it's a 4 years old bug, but it's an easy hack, so try to promote it any where you can, we will very warmly welcome any developer with low skills who want to improve his knowledge, so don't hesitate to be active in searching for this [easy] hacker. Kind regards Sophie -- 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
RE: [tdf-discuss] Re: Oracle contributes OOo Code to ApacheSoftwareFoundation'sIncubator
-Original Message- From: sophie [mailto:gautier.sop...@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, June 03, 2011 7:33 PM To: discuss@documentfoundation.org Subject: Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Oracle contributes OOo Code to ApacheSoftwareFoundation'sIncubator Now to your bug Pieter, you're sad because it's a 4 years old bug, but it's an easy hack, so try to promote it any where you can, we will very warmly welcome any developer with low skills who want to improve his knowledge, so don't hesitate to be active in searching for this [easy] hacker. Kind regards Sophie First, it is not my bug. Someone else posted it on the OO site. I supported it when I bumped into the problem. Secondly, Yes I am working on getting someone to work on it. This response of mine is one of those actions. I understand that in the meantime somebody has assigned this task to Cedric Bosdonnat. In a private exchange with Cedric, he said he prefers a more principled solution using table styles. I agree with him, and I understand that such a thing is not a trivial task! Best, Pieter -- 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
Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Oracle contributes OOo Code to Apache Software Foundation's Incubator
On 01/06/2011 Robert Holtzman wrote: On Wed, Jun 01, 2011 at 09:51:09AM -0700, NoOp wrote: http://blog.documentfoundation.org/2011/06/01/statement-about-oracles-move-to-donate-openoffice-org-assets-to-the-apache-foundation/ TDF's statement included : Today we welcome Oracle’s donation of code that has previously been proprietary to the Apache Software Foundation, it is great to see key user features released in a form that can be included into LibreOffice. Since when is OOo proprietary? I actually asked for a clarification in one of the first comments (#7 at above link), more than 48 hours ago, but nothing happened so far. Either the sentence just means that the code in OpenOffice.org and LibreOffice dating back to around 15 years ago was at that time proprietary (and this would be totally irrelevant in context, and I wouldn't know why someone would write it and relate it to key user features released in a form that can be included into LibreOffice)... ...or it means that people who wrote that blog post know that Oracle released more than just the OpenOffice.org code (and here the candidates would obviously be the proprietary components of Oracle Open Office: incremental updates, Alfresco plugin, migration tools... why not, even Oracle Cloud Office). I hope that the right interpretation is the latter, since this would mean a significant advance available for OpenOffice.org-based suites. But I really cannot guess what the statement meant. The OpenOffice.org Apache Incubator Proposal does not contain elements that would justify that sentence in the Document Foundation statement. Regards, Andrea. -- 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
Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Oracle contributes OOo Code to Apache Software Foundation's Incubator
On 3 Jun 2011, at 19:59, Andrea Pescetti wrote: On 01/06/2011 Robert Holtzman wrote: On Wed, Jun 01, 2011 at 09:51:09AM -0700, NoOp wrote: http://blog.documentfoundation.org/2011/06/01/statement-about-oracles-move-to-donate-openoffice-org-assets-to-the-apache-foundation/ TDF's statement included : Today we welcome Oracle’s donation of code that has previously been proprietary to the Apache Software Foundation, it is great to see key user features released in a form that can be included into LibreOffice. Since when is OOo proprietary? I actually asked for a clarification in one of the first comments (#7 at above link), more than 48 hours ago, but nothing happened so far. Either the sentence just means that the code in OpenOffice.org and LibreOffice dating back to around 15 years ago was at that time proprietary (and this would be totally irrelevant in context, and I wouldn't know why someone would write it and relate it to key user features released in a form that can be included into LibreOffice)... ...or it means that people who wrote that blog post know that Oracle released more than just the OpenOffice.org code (and here the candidates would obviously be the proprietary components of Oracle Open Office: incremental updates, Alfresco plugin, migration tools... why not, even Oracle Cloud Office). I hope that the right interpretation is the latter, since this would mean a significant advance available for OpenOffice.org-based suites. But I really cannot guess what the statement meant. The OpenOffice.org Apache Incubator Proposal does not contain elements that would justify that sentence in the Document Foundation statement. It could just be that the author was trying hard to be positive. S. -- 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
Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Oracle contributes OOo Code to Apache Software Foundation'sIncubator
On Fri, Jun 3, 2011 at 11:30 AM, Harold Fuchs hwfa.libreoff...@gmail.com wrote: don't have a case and should return to the fold. So, why don't the LO folk do a deal with Apache, combine the best bits of OOo with LO to get back to a single product and form jointly with the Apache folk an LO Foundation. It seems completely crazy to have two sets of developers and two sets of code. All that does is sow FUD (Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt) in the minds of because of the license change? Why would you want to use apache2.0 license? I would prefer gpl over that or lgpl. mike -- 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
Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Oracle contributes OOo Code to Apache Software Foundation'sIncubator
Hi Ian, Ian Lynch wrote (03-06-11 15:47) I just signed up as a committer on the Apache incubator this morning. Why? Am I against LO and TDF - no, at heart I'm a copyleft person, however, there are also practical realities to consider too sometimes. What is the worst case? OOo code and trademark go with Apache and then little is done. LO and Indeed, this is not purely hypothetical. There has a really lot to be done before a possible OOo Apache project is more or less ready. Lots of Licence incompatible stuff has to be replaced, all infra and procedures etc has to be set up. People need to join and find their way. Will costs months. In the mean time LibreOffice, with already 8 month of code clean up, build improvements etc grows on. So there will be an pretty large gap for OOo-Apache to bridge. A pity also for LibreOffice, since that will make it much harder to profit from work done in OOo-Apache. TDF can carry on business as usual. Best case scenario (depending on what you view as good or bad :-) ) IBM and others put in engineering effort and the OOo code base improves. TDF take and improve that code and release it with a copyleft license. TDF engineers cooperate with OOo engineers to ensure that as far as possible both sets of code remain manageable. Ok, there is a threat that developers from the TDF camp migrate to the OOo camp. But really there is not much choice than to take that risk. It will depend on how many really want only to work on copyleft code. The not possible scenario which we might have liked better is Oracle donate everything to TDF - but they didn't and they won't so it's a case of if my aunt had balls she would be my uncle. She hasn't so she isn't. :-) One thing that is very clear is that if TDF had not been formed Oracle would not transferred things to Apache, at least not this soon. So brilliant you guys, you took a risk and it has at least mostly worked if not perfectly. Better now to look for the opportunities rather than the threats when really there is not much that can be done about them. Pack out the committers list on Apache and make sure you have a say in the governance of OOo as well as TDF and LO. It would be my strategy not to put too much energy in it from the start. As pointed out above, there is a massive gap to bridge. And much to do on LibreOffice. So not block it, but be careful with your precious time and energy. And - looking at IBM's past promised contributions to OOo and what came out of it - it is safe and reasonable to first see how they really make OOo-Apache work. If that turns out positive, I think it is OK and fair to put much more energy in it. Best, Cor -- - http://nl.libreoffice.org - giving openoffice.org its foundation :: The Document Foundation - -- 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
[tdf-discuss] Re: Oracle contributes OOo Code to Apache Software Foundation'sIncubator
It seems that the logic here is: code for OpenOffice and you are contributing to both projects, code for LibreOffice and you only contribute to one :) http://www.robweir.com/blog/2011/06/apache-openoffice-how-to-get-involved.html -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Oracle-contributes-OOo-Code-to-Apache-Software-Foundation-s-Incubator-tp3011527p3021560.html Sent from the Discuss mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- 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
Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Oracle contributes OOo Code to Apache Software Foundation'sIncubator
On Fri, Jun 3, 2011 at 3:25 AM, Augustine Souza aesouza2...@gmail.com wrote: On 6/3/11, Harold Fuchs hwfa.libreoff...@gmail.com wrote: ... The LO folk left the OOo group because OOo was, in their opinion, going to be over-controlled (by Oracle). Now that this is no longer true, the LO folk don't have a case and should return to the fold. ... Nonsense. Oh, and by the way, get rid of the asinine name LibreOffice which half the world can't pronounce and which three quarters of the world doesn't understand the meaning of. More nonsense. Augustine Souza...+1 -- 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
[tdf-discuss] Hello! ... and lurking :-)
Hi all, I imagine you've all heard about the proposal[1] to contribute OO.o to the Apache Software Foundation. I've been involved with Apache for well over a decade, on its Board of Directors since 2001, its current Vice Chairman, the VP of Apache Subversion, and was the Chairman for five years. In short: lots of Apache experience. I've been following and participating in the discussion around the OO.o proposal on the gene...@incubator.apache.org list[1]. One of the threads of that discussion was to reach out to the people in the Document Foundation and the LibreOffice communities. So... that's this email. I'm now subscribed to discuss@df, steering-discuss@df, and libreoffice@freedesktop. I intend to lurk regarding all the regular work that you all are doing here. I'll be paying particular attention to any conversations or concerns that you may have about the OOo/Apache stuff, and will attempt to answer questions that you may have. I'm catching up on the archives now. If you have any comments, questions, or concerns, then please feel free to direct them my way (on whatever list). I'm here to listen and understand, and to offer up answers where I can. Cheers, -g [1] http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/OpenOfficeProposal [2] send mail to general-subscr...@incubator.apache.org if you would like to subscribe and directly talk about the proposal -- 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
Re: [tdf-discuss] Hello! ... and lurking :-)
Hi Greg, all, thank you very much for coming here! Your efforts in working on a community united and collaborating as much as possible are really appreciated! Greg Stein schrieb: Hi all, I imagine you've all heard about the proposal[1] to contribute OO.o to the Apache Software Foundation. I've been involved with Apache for well over a decade, on its Board of Directors since 2001, its current Vice Chairman, the VP of Apache Subversion, and was the Chairman for five years. In short: lots of Apache experience. Short introduction from my side: For about 6 or 7 years active member of the OOo community, spent quite an amount of time in helping to avoid a split in the germanophone OOo project back in 2004 (?), became central contributor and coordinator in OOo Art and Branding Project and now here at LibreOffice from Sept. 2010. I've been following and participating in the discussion around the OO.o proposal on the gene...@incubator.apache.org list[1]. One of the threads of that discussion was to reach out to the people in the Document Foundation and the LibreOffice communities. So... that's this email. I'm now subscribed to discuss@df, steering-discuss@df, and libreoffice@freedesktop. I think this list here is the best for discussions about the community, steering-discuss for contacting the Steering Committee members and libO@freedesktop for developers. I intend to lurk regarding all the regular work that you all are doing here. I'll be paying particular attention to any conversations or concerns that you may have about the OOo/Apache stuff, and will attempt to answer questions that you may have. I'm catching up on the archives now. That's what I tried with the general@incubator list - quite challenging at this time ;-) I already wanted subscribe to it and post my question there, but perhaps (due to the emotional style of discussion over there at the moment) it is better to ask you here: In his mail http://www.mail-archive.com/general@incubator.apache.org/msg28210.html Sam Ruby points out, that an incubator proposal has to be discussed in the community before presenting it to Apache. He cites the guidelines for proposals: http://incubator.apache.org/guides/proposal.html The incoming community needs to work together before presenting this proposal to the incubator. Think about and discuss future goals and the reasons for coming to Apache. If this would have been handled in a proper way, Oracle would have discussed this step with the OpenOffice.org community *before*. This would have reduced the traffic at the Apache list to a minimum - leaving out bad blood and lot of noise... As you probably know, defining the OpenOffice.org community has been easy until last September, but now there are two different definitions, depending on whom you ask: While the people working here on LibreOffice understand themselves and the left-over OpenOffice.org as two projects within one community, some people on the OOo lists deny the positive feelings towards OpenOffice.org by the people who decided to create a single-sponsor independent foundation 8 months ago. In their eyes the LibO-supporter lost their right to support OpenOffice.org and feel as OOo community member with their support of LibreOffice. This background is important to know, if you want to understand, what is going on at the Apache list. But not even the remnant OOo project (that lacks an active governing body since all Community Council members not being payed by Oracle have been forced to leave when they announced their dedication to an independent foundation and all present seats should have been re-elected for a long time) has been involved in discussion before Oracle donated the trademark to Apache and IBM (via Rob Weir) proposed the incubator project to Apache. My question is: Wouldn't it be reasonable to have a discussion - and a positive voting for Apache - inside the (smaller or broader) OpenOffice.org community *before* reaching out for Apache? If I understand it right, Apache projects are community projects - not sponsor based projects (even if they have bought the communities trademarks from entities who held them once as legal representatives for the community)? If you have any comments, questions, or concerns, then please feel free to direct them my way (on whatever list). I'm here to listen and understand, and to offer up answers where I can. There are some other points I'd like to mention - like copy-left dedication of the mainly volunteer community who dislike any company increasing their profits by using these volunteers hard work (and lot of time) without giving back anything (not even respect) - but this would lead too far in this single mail. Cheers, -g Welcome here again, Greg! Best regards Bernhard [1] http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/OpenOfficeProposal [2] send mail to general-subscr...@incubator.apache.org if you would like to subscribe and directly
Re: [tdf-discuss] Hello! ... and lurking :-)
Hey Bernhard, See my responses inline below: On Fri, Jun 3, 2011 at 21:09, Bernhard Dippold bernh...@familie-dippold.at wrote: ... I think this list here is the best for discussions about the community, steering-discuss for contacting the Steering Committee members and libO@freedesktop for developers. Gotcha. Those were the three recommended, and I've see discussion about the Apache proposal on all three. I suspect that I'll just stay in lurk mode over on libO :-) I intend to lurk regarding all the regular work that you all are doing here. I'll be paying particular attention to any conversations or concerns that you may have about the OOo/Apache stuff, and will attempt to answer questions that you may have. I'm catching up on the archives now. That's what I tried with the general@incubator list - quite challenging at this time ;-) heheh... yeah, seriously. It's been quite a time sink! :-) ... but much fun! I already wanted subscribe to it and post my question there, but perhaps (due to the emotional style of discussion over there at the moment) it is better to ask you here: Oh, I can answer these here no problem. I suspect the emotion is slowing down. We're still just a couple days past announcement, and I think people are still pondering what it all really means. Give people the weekend, and I think things will work much better. Anyways. Below: In his mail http://www.mail-archive.com/general@incubator.apache.org/msg28210.html Sam Ruby points out, that an incubator proposal has to be discussed in the community before presenting it to Apache. He cites the guidelines for proposals: http://incubator.apache.org/guides/proposal.html The incoming community needs to work together before presenting this proposal to the incubator. Think about and discuss future goals and the reasons for coming to Apache. If this would have been handled in a proper way, Oracle would have discussed this step with the OpenOffice.org community *before*. That's a guideline. And it is really talking about other Open Source communities. For example, the incoming Subversion or SpamAssassin or Cassandra communities. On the other hand, we've had lots of donations from corporations, where own all of the code. Needless to say, they do not have to confer with anybody *outside* of their organization. But... all that said: the core of your thinking is absolutely correct. It would have been best if Oracle had conferred more with the community at large. But the simple fact is they were not *obligated* to do so. It also sounds like they spoke to at least a few people from the TDF (per Rob Weir's comment about a conference call in April). Another thing to consider: what if they did talk to the entire community and *still* decided to go with the Apache approach? That could have happened, and I suspect people would be even more upset :-P From appearances, and what I understand about history, it may also be that Oracle had some contractual obligations with IBM. They may have resolved those with this approach (yes: it seems very clear that IBM was a big mover in Oracle's choice). It is hard to say, being on the outside. The shortest answer is: they owned the code, they decided, we all have to live with that choice. (as a comparison point, I bet a bunch of MySQL contributors also felt pretty pissed off when MySQL AB got bought by Sun, and the employees got paid big bucks... while the open source contributors got squat... that is the risk of contributing to code owned by a corporation; that imbalance of power is constructed and maintained by copyleft licenses; it is rather unfortunate) This would have reduced the traffic at the Apache list to a minimum - leaving out bad blood and lot of noise... Agreed. As you probably know, defining the OpenOffice.org community has been easy until last September, but now there are two different definitions, depending on whom you ask: While the people working here on LibreOffice understand themselves and the left-over OpenOffice.org as two projects within one community, some people on the OOo lists deny the positive feelings towards OpenOffice.org by the people who decided to create a single-sponsor independent foundation 8 months ago. In their eyes the LibO-supporter lost their right to support OpenOffice.org and feel as OOo community member with their support of LibreOffice. This background is important to know, if you want to understand, what is going on at the Apache list. Thanks for the background. It does help to define the various groups within the larger community. But not even the remnant OOo project (that lacks an active governing body since all Community Council members not being payed by Oracle have been forced to leave when they announced their dedication to an independent foundation and all present seats should have been re-elected for a long time) has been involved in discussion before Oracle donated the trademark to Apache and IBM (via
[tdf-discuss] Proposal to join Apache OpenOffice
Greetings All, Some of you will remember me as a long time member of the OpenOffice.org community. In fact, back in the day, it was sometimes just myself and Michael Meeks who were openly complaining on the OOo mailing list about Sun's handling of the community :-) I'm writing today about what is going on over at the Apache project. When I heard Oracle was donating the OpenOffice code to the Apache project, I headed over there to see what was going on. I offer this brief report to bring everyone up to speed: - According to officers of the Apache Software Foundation, Oracle donated OpenOffice to the ASF by executing the ASF's standard copyright grant. This grant allows the ASF to release the OpenOffice code under the Apache License. - The ASF however has a process to accept a project. The OpenOffice project is now in the proposal stage. If accepted, it will join the Apache Incubator and become a podling, which is basically a project-in-development. During the podling stage, the project would be expected to complete the steps needed to become a full ASF project. Among other requirements, the podling project has to review the copyright history of all code to ensure it has a clean title and is or can be licensed under the Apache License. If it completes that process, it then becomes a full Apache project. See https://blogs.apache.org/foundation/entry/incubation_at_apache_what_s - While the code donation was made by Oracle, the primary champion in the effort to get the code accepted as is Apache Project is IBM. Let's have no illusions or delusions about this. IBM has a self-interested motive in championing this project. Basically, IBM would like to setup a community where both it and other contributors make contributions under the Apache License, and then IBM would take some or all of those contributions and use them in its proprietary products which includes for example IBM Lotus Symphony. The Apache License specifically allows this. In fact, the Apache License allows anyone to take the code and use it in their own project, open source or closed source. In the Apache world, that is considered a feature not a bug. The ASF would like to see as many people using the code as possible, and for that reason, their license is as liberal as possible, allowing anyone to use the code. That is exactly the reason that IBM is championing this as an Apache Project, rather than a LGPL project. And that brings me (almost) to the point of this email. Any code contributed to the Apache OpenOffice project could be used by anyone, including The Document Foundation, which can take the code, integrate it into LibreOffice, and release it under the LGPL. Sounds like a good deal, huh? Here's the rub. IBM, as I mentioned, is doing this for self-interested reasons. I would like to propose the members of LibreOffice community get involved in this for similarly self-interested reasons. I understand there are some bad feelings toward IBM. Basically, there is the perception that IBM has been taking OpenOffice code all of these years and contributing little back to the OpenOffice community. That is probably true. As far as I can see, IBM has at least been taking much more than it has given back. I'm not sure that can continue though, because as the champion of the proposed Apache OpenOffice project, IBM is going to have to contribute. So you might say though, why not just sit back, let IBM make contributions to Apache OpenOffice, and then we'll just cherry pick what we want for LibreOffice. Well that would certainly work, but I don't think it would work as well as getting involved. There is also another player in this, and that is the Apache Software Foundation. The ASF is an honorable organization with a long track record in open source and they are dedicated to fostering a community. In the ASF, anyone can contribute. Contributions and participation are made by individuals, not by or on behalf of companies or organizations. The community determines the direction of the project. Membership in the community is based on merit, which is measured not just by code contributions, but by anything that supports the project, which could also include documentation, testing, bug reports, etc. So while the LibreOffice could just sit back and cherry-pick the project, if its members get involved, they can help determine the direction of the project, ensuring that the project direction and design decision are compatible with LibreOffice and have the maximum value to LibreOffice. The ASF has no problems with this--in fact, they encourage it. Just as IBM is getting involved in an Apache OpenOffice project because they want to use the code in their products, the ASF will welcome TDF members getting involved for the same self-interested reason, to use the code in LibreOffice. Critically, at this stage in the process, everyone has a free pass to get involved. Normally, once the project is up and running, you would
[tdf-discuss] Re: [Libreoffice] Hello! ... and lurking :-)
[trimming to just discuss@, as my understanding is that is the proper venue for this topic] On Fri, Jun 3, 2011 at 21:47, Norbert Thiebaud nthieb...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Jun 3, 2011 at 7:15 PM, Greg Stein gst...@gmail.com wrote: Hi all, If you have any comments, questions, or concerns, then please feel free to direct them my way (on whatever list). I'm here to listen and understand, and to offer up answers where I can. I have a question: Why would Apache contemplate helping IBM pull a Jenkins/Hudson on us, fragmenting the license of a project that has been with a uniform licensing so far ? Apache helps out any community that wants to work under our umbrella. The Foundation itself provides the legal umbrella, governance, operations, infrastructure, and a bunch of other things. It is there to help its community. The Foundation has a proposal before it to help a to-be-defined community to work on OO.o as an Apache project. That TBD-community is not IBM and it is not Oracle. There are about 15 to 20 people[1] stepping up to launch that community. Lots of projects at the Foundation have duplicated other projects and communities. And vice versa. The Apache HTTPD Server is the most popular server on the planet, but lighttpd and nginx are also quite popular. We aren't going to shut down HTTPD just because it duplicates others. And other groups aren't going to stop building code just because we already have some. Open Source is about scratching your own itch. It isn't about saying well, somebody else is choosing to do it their way, so I better not attempt to try it my way. We're helping that TBD community. If that helps corporations out there, then fine. Lots of Apache projects have companies built around them (Lucene, Hadoop, HTTPD, Tomcat, Subversion, etc ... all have *very* strong corporate involvement). Apache is a charity. We produce code for the benefit of *everybody*. Whether that is individuals, educational institutions, or corporate enterprises. Our software is for the public good. By using a permissive license, we can provide the software to *everybody*, and we can do that on *equal* terms for everybody. No winners. No losers. Now all that said, I am NOT forgetting that Oracle's choice to contribute OO.o (code and trademarks) to Apache *could* be a divisive move. I'm not convinced that it *must* be divisive. I believe that there are solutions that works for the benefit of the entire ecosystem (OO.o, LO, and all the other derivatives). We don't have to let it divide us. (Oracle could merge our changes... they elected _not_ to do so because they wanted a Copyright assignment on top of the code, but that was not a licensing incompatibility) You had a choice to sign the assignment or not. It sounds like you chose not to, so it is no surprise to me that they elected to not merge your work. Even if you *had* signed the assignment, it sounds like Oracle had pretty much given up and wouldn't have merged your work anyways :-P You (Apache) are lending your good name to a nasty endeavor, for the benefit of a company that has an history of screwing you over (Harmony ?) Heh. I think that you're missing a lot of information in that statement. Let me just hit a few highlights: * IBM helped us to START the Foundation * IBM contributed the original Axis, Xalan, Xerces, and Derby codebases (probably more) * IBM has contributed dozens and dozens of developers across Apache projects over the past decade * IBM pulled out of Harmony, but our code is *still* there and is *still* in use by people. there are still developers there, but not enough. the community has slowed down and is deciding what to do. IBM didn't screw us, as any developer could leave any project at any time. that is the way it works * Oracle really screwed us on the JCP * Oracle is suing one of our Harmony users (Google and Android) So if we're gonna be pissed at anybody... it probably isn't IBM. But hey... we're above that. Remember our mission: provide software to the public. We're a CHARITY. We are not supposed to hold grudges. We're just supposed to move on, and build more code. Ironically what seems to be happening at Apache is very reminiscent to me to the ISO/MSXML debacle... Some corporation exploiting the letter of your governance to better abuse the spirit of it. I am sure that IBM will use our code for their own lucrative benefit. Apache exists to enable that. But we also exist to ensure that *anybody* can use our code to their own benefit. Including you. (that is _if_ I understand what Apache stand for... but maybe I'm misguided) Norbert PS: I strongly encourage you to read: http://www.itworld.com/software/170521/big-winner-apache-openofficeorg#comment-9942111 Yup. I read it when it was first published. Very good article. That shed a very illuminating light on IBM's involvement in OOo, and why it is hard to take seriously their grandiose promises... that would by far not been the first time,
Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Oracle contributes OOo Code to Apache Software Foundation'sIncubator
On Sat, Jun 4, 2011 at 12:00 AM, plino pedl...@gmail.com wrote: It seems that the logic here is: code for OpenOffice and you are contributing to both projects, code for LibreOffice and you only contribute to one :) http://www.robweir.com/blog/2011/06/apache-openoffice-how-to-get-involved.html I would say, If you are adding to ooo, you are not only contributing to both, but also to ibm\s fork and any other fork. but seriously, if you are the original author you can in theory apply your patch to both, or publish your code standalone so it can be used by everyone. Also, seeing what Apple, and Microsoft do to public domain code (DRM and lockdown) makes me want to not allow them to profit from my work, at least if I am doing it on my free time. Sure If i am being paid to work on something by a university or research grant it might make sense to be public domain or Apache licensed. Of course, this discussion has been done a million times and everyone has their preference, I am not going to convince anyone here. mike -- 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
Re: [tdf-discuss] Proposal to join Apache OpenOffice
On Fri, Jun 3, 2011 at 22:06, Allen Pulsifer pulsi...@openoffice.org wrote: ... Some of you may have noticed that Greg Stein, a member of the Apache Software Foundation Board of Directors has joined this list and offered to answer any questions. Please feel free to ask him about anything that is on your mind. He would be a better person to answer, since I'm new to all this Apache stuff myself :-) Thanks for the great email, Allen, and for the shout-out. Yes, I'm here listening. Most people at Apache are not familiar with this community, and so I feel it is important to listen and lurk here to get a better understanding. Sure... I can also answer questions, and would be more than happy to do that. In any discussion threads that may pop up, about the Apache work, I'll also attempt to fill in blanks where I see them. Cheers, -g -- 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
Re: [tdf-discuss] Proposal to join Apache OpenOffice
On 04/06/11 06:21, Greg Stein wrote: On Fri, Jun 3, 2011 at 22:06, Allen Pulsifer pulsi...@openoffice.org wrote: ... Some of you may have noticed that Greg Stein, a member of the Apache Software Foundation Board of Directors has joined this list and offered to answer any questions. Please feel free to ask him about anything that is on your mind. He would be a better person to answer, since I'm new to all this Apache stuff myself :-) Thanks for the great email, Allen, and for the shout-out. Yes, I'm here listening. Most people at Apache are not familiar with this community, and so I feel it is important to listen and lurk here to get a better understanding. Sure... I can also answer questions, and would be more than happy to do that. In any discussion threads that may pop up, about the Apache work, I'll also attempt to fill in blanks where I see them. Cheers, -g Most of us do indeed like to retain the ownership ourselves, but I don't personally have any problems with reusing my translations etc in software. People take great pride in contributing and want to be credited for what they achieve. You might want to clarify the situation for the sceptics, who don't want their code lost in some proprietary project not acknowledging their work, but rather claiming it as their own. Regards, Olav Dahlum -- 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
