[steering-discuss] SPI BOD meeting 8th June
Hi all, For information the Board of Directors of Software in the Public Interest will hold a public board of directors meeting this Wednesday 8th June 2011 at 20:30 UTC. As the liaison for TDF, I'll attend the meeting. Kind regards Sophie -- Founding member of The Document Foundation -- 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: [steering-discuss] About elections
Hi, FYI: We asked the Membership Committee to follow-up with some information on membership status and elections soon, so stay tuned. :-) Florian -- Florian Effenberger flo...@documentfoundation.org Steering Committee and Founding Member of The Document Foundation Tel: +49 8341 99660880 | Mobile: +49 151 14424108 Skype: floeff | Twitter/Identi.ca: @floeff -- 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: [steering-discuss] Request for official statement about dedicated logos for community groups
Hi Bernhard, Bernhard Dippold wrote on 2011-05-16 23.31: Therefore I'd like to propose my position as starting point for a SC discussion, leading to a decision we can base our work on and upload to the wiki for future reference. currently working on some older mails... has this already been adressed? Florian -- Florian Effenberger flo...@documentfoundation.org Steering Committee and Founding Member of The Document Foundation Tel: +49 8341 99660880 | Mobile: +49 151 14424108 Skype: floeff | Twitter/Identi.ca: @floeff -- 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: [steering-discuss] About elections
On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 18:44, Norbert Thiebaud nthieb...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 5:08 PM, Florian Effenberger flo...@documentfoundation.org wrote: Hi, FYI: We asked the Membership Committee to follow-up with some information on membership status and elections soon, so stay tuned. :-) Practical question: Shouldn't the MC start collecting ssh public-key ? People having commit access to git or login to any infra box already have one available... but some member may not have one already on file and collecting them with some level of chain of trust may not be completely trivial, and more importantly, may induce some significant delay. I suppose the the election won't be conducted in-person, but presumably on-line... some level of temper-proof seems necessary, if for no other reason than to avoid FUD and smear campaign about the legitimacy of our process (there have been enough of that already in the blog of a notorious Big Blue employee) Completely orthogonal to all the OOo and Apache stuff going on... the ASF has an online voting tool that you guys may be interested in. There is both a command line version (for ssh users), and a web-based version (if you guys also have web-based authentication for your Members). That tool may be useful for you guys. It provides for secure and private/secret voting. Just select a few people to do the vote counting, and away you go. It is located in a private repository, but I see no reason that it couldn't be public (simply a historic accident, I believe). If you're interested, I can snap a copy of the command line stuff. For the web-based version, please ask on infrastruct...@apache.org. Cheers, -g -- 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: [steering-discuss] About elections
Hi, I remember that, some time ago, Michael Meeks suggested OpenSTV as a tool (http://www.openstv.org/). -- David Nelson -- 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] Re: QA manual test Litmus session on 3.3.3Rc
Hi Plino, On 07/06/2011 02:51, plino wrote: [...] It would help if every time a user asks for a bug fix or a new feature, someone didn't say excellent, why don't you fix it / add it yourself? If LO has hundreds of developers then maybe there is no need for everybody to learn how to code and fix the problems themselves? Unfortunately it's even not enough, there is still a big amount of bug triaging to do that is enormously time consuming for developers. So I agree there is no need to say it each time a user ask for a feature or a bug fix, but if this user could become a contributor, it's even better. [...] But it's you who make this separation :) No, it's not. The Devs have made it pretty clear that the Dev mailing list is only for Development issues (which I find reasonable). But since they don't show up on the Users mailing list, where is the bridge? We are, those electron who are on several mailing lists like l10n, projects, doc, etc... BTW the Discuss list isn't the bridge either... The bridge are people like you, Cor Nouws and Tom Davies who dialog with users and can reach the devs ;) Yes, because a list is just a tool, but discuss@ is a list where I know several people from the native language communities are on, and they will tell there communities that the discussion is ongoing on the projects@ list. The users@ list you talk about is an English speaking list and doesn't reach the other users@ lists of the project. [...] That is not the feeling I get in the Users list... I can see your point but it can be interpreted (as I did and from the lack of answers, other users) that Users are not needed in QA. Just wanted to clear this out so that other Users who read this know that they are welcome to join QA ;) Maybe you should post this topic there just in case? As I said, noise reduction: I'll wait to see how we goes with the other languages groups and if we need more EN native speakers, I'll ask on the users list. Finally, this mailing list separation doesn't help either. If this was a forum you would simply post a warning on each section with the link to the appropriate sub-forum and anyone could join without having to subscribe. So I ask again: can TDF please, set up an OFFICIAL forum for those who are more comfortable with forums? Oh, yes, with a forum it would be very simple, I would not be there at all :) so nothing to push for me or to organize because too bandwith consuming and expensive. And by the way, I know that my demand will reach the FR forum and may be other languages too, so why don't you pass it to the EN forum? 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] How Close Is TDF...? [WAS Re: OpenOffice.org Apache Incubator Proposal: Splitting^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^HREUNITING the Community?]
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 9:21 PM, Volker Merschmann merschm...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, 2011/6/6 Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com: On Jun 6, 2011, at 3:57 PM, Volker Merschmann wrote: 2011/6/6 Robert Burrell Donkin robertburrelldon...@gmail.com: Until the TDF has taken that last step, expect to be challenged about your readiness ;-) I'd like to take up your offer :-) But here on this list and on the understanding that we're trying to work together to assess for the public record how close the TDF is TDF is so near that it had offered help to Oracle last month: http://blog.documentfoundation.org/2011/06/06/publishing-our-recommendation-to-oracle/ The TDF certainly seems confident. People (and corporations) are often reluctant to accept claims from campaigning organisations without public evidence. Hopefully, we might be able to work together to establish clearly and in public where the TDF is today and where it might be tomorrow. Good to see the list... Not knowing things for sure, but I would guess that Oracle had issues with #3, which gave away (what I would expect to be) huge chunks of h/w infrastructure, esp to an entity which was still in the process (though close!) of finalizing its foundational status... I think you have misread that. That's the way I read it too. Thanks for clarifying. There was no question for getting any infrastructure or hardware. Just the possiblity to _transfer_ the content of wikis/web etc. This is the same as with ASF now. And you oversee (as many) that there is an interim legal entity, the Freies Office Deutschland e.V.. (I'll try to avoid asking too many questions at once) 1. What would constrain this legal entity from closed sourcing these assets or selling them? 2. What would transfer of assets achieve for the TDF that a license would not? Robert -- 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: [Libreoffice] Proposal to join Apache OpenOffice
Hi Gary, NoOp wrote (07-06-11 03:05) 2. @TDF: More importantly (from my POV) - what, if any, affect will this have on TDF/LO if OOo 'dies in Apache'? It has become clear to me the last week or so, that there is a close to fundamental difference in the approach by IBM. This has been reflected in the past, has become my understanding these weeks too (bit late, well bit naive to sometimes) in the way they were present (...) in the old OOo project. Now of course they want to gather as much support as possible around the Apache OOo project. Just as we would like to see as much as possible support around LibreOffice. If Apache OOo comes off the ground, at a certain point people will start to find the rationale - despite the existing differences - to some practical cooperation. So if OOo would die in Apache - would be a pity - that last exercise could be skipped. And people would natural start to work more in TDF. But I am well aware that there are still people disappointed or frustrated by the way TDF/LibreOffice started. Be it because they feel ignored (it simply was impossible to get all people involved at that stage) or because they were not so popular in the community, or because they felt our step was unfair in relation to all the good work that the main sponsor did over the last years, or because .. Though I have different thoughts on some of the issues, I can well understand most of the feelings and expect that at least part of those will not likely join with LibreOffice. And then of course there is IBM. In any case for the license part TDF tried as much as possible to cater for them with MPL. So that might help for a pragmatic outcome. This all in the if scenario. Apologies if this may have already been asked answered. If so, can someone point me to the appropriate messages within the hundreds of posts many, many threads on the ASF incubator list, or on this list? Well, as much letters I spend on the if-subject above, so little Would take me some time to dig the indeed already impressive archives on this subject, to be able to point you to the answers that will not help you much further than the words I spend on this 'if-subject' above and than your own imagination. It is my experience in the discussions there that fundamental questions on the why and how of the situation are ignored or circumvented, which is fair enough understandable since it is not really what the podling in Apache is about, or even fed with FUD, which is less palatable IMO. HTH a bit, Regards Cor (who realises that there are still some use case questions pending that we together worked on few weeks ago :-\ ) -- - Cor - http://nl.libreoffice.org -- 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] How Close Is TDF...? [WAS Re: OpenOffice.org Apache Incubator Proposal: Splitting^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^HREUNITING the Community?]
Robert Burrell Donkin wrote (07-06-11 09:00) The TDF certainly seems confident. People (and corporations) are often reluctant to accept claims from campaigning organisations without public evidence. Hopefully, we might be able to work together to establish clearly and in public where the TDF is today and where it might be tomorrow. All fine to show what TDF is - we do that oh so often. But could you pls explain what purpose this would serve in the Apache OOO project ? Thanks, -- - Cor - http://nl.libreoffice.org -- 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] How Close Is TDF...? [WAS Re: OpenOffice.org Apache Incubator Proposal: Splitting^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^HREUNITING the Community?]
On Jun 6, 2011, at 4:20 PM, Florian Effenberger wrote: Hi, Jim Jagielski wrote on 2011-06-06 22.13: Good to see the list... Not knowing things for sure, but I would guess that Oracle had issues with #3, which gave away (what I would expect to be) huge chunks of h/w infrastructure, esp to an entity which was still in the process (though close!) of finalizing its foundational status... your interpretation of #3 is wrong. It reads available for transfer, and emphasizes that by into The Document Foundation's infrastructure. There is not a single word about hardware wanted. Thx for the clarification... BTW, it also mentions integration with Oracle ERP and CRM stacks Did you really want (and expect) direct access to such incredibly sensitive and important parts of Oracle's business structure? How does that help the community? It seems much more something a competing business would want. -- 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] How Close Is TDF...?
On 6/7/11 1:50 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote: Thx for the clarification... BTW, it also mentions integration with Oracle ERP and CRM stacks Did you really want (and expect) direct access to such incredibly sensitive and important parts of Oracle's business structure? How does that help the community? It seems much more something a competing business would want. The sentence is: This is why we welcome a technical cooperation with Oracle on the development and maintenance of connectors with the Oracle and MySQL databases as well as the integration with Oracle ERP and CRM stacks. Technical cooperation is quite a different thing from direct access. Microsoft third parties have developed a wealth of these connectors and integration features with Oracle products, which are in the interest of Oracle as well as the end user. These integration features were supposed to be part of the proprietary product Oracle Open Office, but have only been hinted on the product sales pitch and never provided by Oracle. Although I am not a developer, I imagine that in order to develop their plugins MS third parties have used some kind of APIs or SDK in order to get access to pieces of information inside Oracle database or CRM data files. Anyway, if there was something to be clarified about our document, a short email or a phone call asking for further details - instead of a prolonged we are still working on it answer - would have been a better choice. I do not think that going over our letter to Oracle with the intent of finding areas where it could have been improved does any good to the exhisting and future relationships. Oracle received this letter in late April and has never reacted, while it looks that in a week has decided for the ASF solution. Fair enough. It is rather evident that there are reasons beyond our understanding, which are part of Oracle corporate perception of TDF. Best regards. -- Italo Vignoli italo.vign...@gmail.com mobile +39.348.5653829 VoIP +39.02.320621813 skype italovignoli -- 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] How Close Is TDF...?
On Jun 7, 2011, at 8:50 AM, Italo Vignoli wrote: I do not think that going over our letter to Oracle with the intent of finding areas where it could have been improved does any good to the exhisting and future relationships. I agree... My going over it was simply to indicate areas which I *think* (again, I have no idea, nor do a *want* to know) may have been reasons Oracle declined, since that seems a point that people are extremely curious about. -- 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] How Close Is TDF...?
On 6/7/11 3:21 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote: I agree... My going over it was simply to indicate areas which I *think* (again, I have no idea, nor do a *want* to know) may have been reasons Oracle declined, since that seems a point that people are extremely curious about. Provided that they received the letter and they never replied I think it is reasonable to state that they never considered it, because of corporate reasons we will never know. Between humans, before declining you usually investigate further and then provide a reason for declining. Otherwise, it looks like you are just ignoring (which is fine). Corporations are just not as educated as humans, and therefore do not feel they should behave following the basics of mutual respect. This is the reason why I have decided to abandon a corporate career. In addition, corporations are just too different from volunteer projects, and trying to understand a decision using a volunteer POV can only lead to severe frustrations. TDF has sent a letter to Oracle, which has been ignored. It is a fact. We decided to send it because we felt we had to try every solution, but what has happened afterwards tells us that the letter has been ignored for unknown reasons (as I am sure that Oracle will never provide any further detail). -- Italo Vignoli italo.vign...@gmail.com mobile +39.348.5653829 VoIP +39.02.320621813 skype italovignoli -- 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] How Close Is TDF...? [WAS Re: OpenOffice.org Apache Incubator Proposal: Splitting^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^HREUNITING the Community?]
Hi, Robert Burrell Donkin wrote on 2011-06-07 09.00: (I'll try to avoid asking too many questions at once) Feel free, I try to reply to all of them, if they haven't been replied in the meantime by someone else. Hard time following all mail threads. :-) 1. What would constrain this legal entity from closed sourcing these assets or selling them? Our statutes. We have binding statutes that are for fostering free office software, and we are acknowledged of being charitable. So, simply changing or closing down things would be nearly impossible. In addition, such topics could be covered by a contract. I can imagine, without speaking officially for the German association here, that there would have been no problem in signing a contract that sets certain limitations on what could be done with the assets. Like You have to keep the assets, do not sell them, and do not make closed source out of things. If you cannot manage them at some point in the future, you have to hand them over to another entity taking care of that.. The question is similar to What would be if Apache Foundation stopped to exist tomorrow?. For all these things, precautions can be taken. :) 2. What would transfer of assets achieve for the TDF that a license would not? I guess it depends on the type of the exact license. An asset transfer is more than a license, and gives more safety and stability, but depending on what is in the license, the latter one could have been enough. But, we need to see two things: If you read the letter of intent, we did not ask for a copyright assignment (i.e. asset transfer) on the *code*, but rather for a relicensing of the code. We did indeed ask for a *trademark* transfer (i.e. asset transfer), but I guess a good license could have worked as well. It's hard to predict that without knowing details, of course, but discussing always helps... :) Florian -- Florian Effenberger flo...@documentfoundation.org Steering Committee and Founding Member of The Document Foundation Tel: +49 8341 99660880 | Mobile: +49 151 14424108 Skype: floeff | Twitter/Identi.ca: @floeff -- 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] Simple solution to avoid #VALUE required
Regina Henschel schrieb: I have just a look in the spec. Thank you for information, good to know! Workaround exist some: Currently I use aSUM()-Workaround, but the problem is that some of the Workarounds might be fixed away in future?! (1) Write 0, and format the cell to not show the 0. Use the format code Standard;Standard; for example. (2) Use a function with range, for example sum(H2:H2) instead of a simple reference H2. (3) Use a case distinction IF(H2=;0;H2) instead of simple reference H2. You can hide (2) and (3), by defining a name for the expression. (4) In OOo you can use N(H2) instead of H2, not in LO. The problem is connected to function N and should be solved together with N in the source code. We should try to get a consensus how LO calculates with text. How are such decisions done? For OOo Oracle had decided, but here? That's the main problem I see (also the Fix causes several thousands of #VALUE in my existing documents). Such decisions should be prepared by something similar to the OOo specifications (but less elaborated) in the Wiki. I will initiate a discussion in the next TSC call. Kind regards Rainer -- 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] How Close Is TDF...?
Italo Vignoli wrote: On 6/7/11 3:21 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote: I agree... My going over it was simply to indicate areas which I *think* (again, I have no idea, nor do a *want* to know) may have been reasons Oracle declined, since that seems a point that people are extremely curious about. Provided that they received the letter and they never replied I think it is reasonable to state that they never considered it, because of corporate reasons we will never know. Between humans, before declining you usually investigate further and then provide a reason for declining. Otherwise, it looks like you are just ignoring (which is fine). Corporations are just not as educated as humans, and therefore do not feel they should behave following the basics of mutual respect. This is the reason why I have decided to abandon a corporate career. Corporations do not have any emotions or feelings, but the people who run them do. Perhaps there were hurt feelings at Oracle because leaving OpenOffice.org to found The Document Foundation meant that these people were dissatisfied with the stewardship provided by Oracle. Perhaps there were feelings of rejection involved here. Perhaps someone at Oracle took it personally. Sometimes people in business can be petty about such things, and from what I have heard about him, Larry Ellison might be that kind. In any case, it is now just so much water under the bridge and it is now time to just move on and forget about OpenOffice. I suspect that OpenOffice will soon become irrelevant. The Document Foundation is doing such a good job with LibreOffice that I really don't think end users will miss OOo. In addition, corporations are just too different from volunteer projects, and trying to understand a decision using a volunteer POV can only lead to severe frustrations. TDF has sent a letter to Oracle, which has been ignored. It is a fact. We decided to send it because we felt we had to try every solution, but what has happened afterwards tells us that the letter has been ignored for unknown reasons (as I am sure that Oracle will never provide any further detail). -- 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: [Libreoffice] Proposal to join Apache OpenOffice
On 06/07/2011 01:01 AM, Cor Nouws wrote: ... Apologies if this may have already been asked answered. If so, can someone point me to the appropriate messages within the hundreds of posts many, many threads on the ASF incubator list, or on this list? Well, as much letters I spend on the if-subject above, so little Would take me some time to dig the indeed already impressive archives on this subject, to be able to point you to the answers that will not help you much further than the words I spend on this 'if-subject' above and than your own imagination. It is my experience in the discussions there that fundamental questions on the why and how of the situation are ignored or circumvented, which is fair enough understandable since it is not really what the podling in Apache is about, or even fed with FUD, which is less palatable IMO. No problem. I was away for the weekend racing just now trying to catch up on the hundreds of posts on multiple lists. HTH a bit, It does. Regards Cor (who realises that there are still some use case questions pending that we together worked on few weeks ago :-\ ) Thanks Cor. Your reply is much appreciated. Gary -- 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: [Libreoffice] Proposal to join Apache OpenOffice
Repeat. On 06/06/2011 06:05 PM, NoOp wrote: On 06/04/2011 05:10 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote: ... Whether OOo lives or dies in Apache, Oracle has made it abundantly clear that this is it... This is one promise I fully expect Oracle will keep :/ Interesting... Could you clarify that statement? 1. @ASF: What happens to OOo if ASF votes *not* to accept the OOo project into the incubator? And it that is the case, what happens to the OOo software that has been granted to the ASF by Oracle? ... Was it your intention to pop into this list with: Hello! I have also just subscribed to both discuss@ and steering-discuss@ in hopes that if there are questions here regarding OOo, LOo, TDF and the ASF, I can respond. I'm also here to also ask that if you feel more comfortable emailing me directly, that is fine as well. and no longer respond to questions? The questions are, IMO, valid and are important - both for OOo and TDF/LO. -- 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: [Libreoffice] Proposal to join Apache OpenOffice
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 21:05, NoOp gl...@sbcglobal.net wrote: On 06/04/2011 05:10 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote: ... Whether OOo lives or dies in Apache, Oracle has made it abundantly clear that this is it... This is one promise I fully expect Oracle will keep :/ Interesting... Could you clarify that statement? 1. @ASF: What happens to OOo if ASF votes *not* to accept the OOo project into the incubator? And it that is the case, what happens to the OOo software that has been granted to the ASF by Oracle? We already have a recorded software grant from Oracle. So in that sense, we can release that code under the ALv2 right now. Normally, Apache will only make releases after appropriate review and testing. But if a project doesn't even get started, then there is nobody to perform that process, so podlings that do not start or do not graduate never get a chance to release the code. In this case, it is quite extra-ordinary. As a Director of the Foundation, I would lobby my fellow Board members to construct a tarball of the granted source files and drop that onto one of our servers. Take it as-is. No warranty implied and all that. I am pretty confident that the Board would agree to such an action. 2. @TDF: More importantly (from my POV) - what, if any, affect will this have on TDF/LO if OOo 'dies in Apache'? I suspect TDF will simply continue as before. They could rebase their files from the ALv2-licensed files, providing a much greater flexibility in the licensing of their overall work. Apologies if this may have already been asked answered. If so, can someone point me to the appropriate messges within the hundreds of posts many, many threads on the ASF incubator list, or on this list? Not a problem. There is a ton of email, and maybe not enough hours in the day to deal with it :-) I saw your later query to Jim, asking for a response. He hasn't responded because he is away at a conference for a few days. 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
[tdf-discuss] Re: [Libreoffice] Proposal to join Apache OpenOffice
On 06/07/2011 05:26 PM, Greg Stein wrote: On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 21:05, NoOp gl...@sbcglobal.net wrote: On 06/04/2011 05:10 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote: ... Whether OOo lives or dies in Apache, Oracle has made it abundantly clear that this is it... This is one promise I fully expect Oracle will keep :/ Interesting... Could you clarify that statement? 1. @ASF: What happens to OOo if ASF votes *not* to accept the OOo project into the incubator? And it that is the case, what happens to the OOo software that has been granted to the ASF by Oracle? We already have a recorded software grant from Oracle. So in that sense, we can release that code under the ALv2 right now. Normally, Apache will only make releases after appropriate review and testing. But if a project doesn't even get started, then there is nobody to perform that process, so podlings that do not start or do not graduate never get a chance to release the code. In this case, it is quite extra-ordinary. As a Director of the Foundation, I would lobby my fellow Board members to construct a tarball of the granted source files and drop that onto one of our servers. Take it as-is. No warranty implied and all that. I am pretty confident that the Board would agree to such an action. 2. @TDF: More importantly (from my POV) - what, if any, affect will this have on TDF/LO if OOo 'dies in Apache'? I suspect TDF will simply continue as before. They could rebase their files from the ALv2-licensed files, providing a much greater flexibility in the licensing of their overall work. Apologies if this may have already been asked answered. If so, can someone point me to the appropriate messges within the hundreds of posts many, many threads on the ASF incubator list, or on this list? Not a problem. There is a ton of email, and maybe not enough hours in the day to deal with it :-) I saw your later query to Jim, asking for a response. He hasn't responded because he is away at a conference for a few days. Cheers, -g Thanks Greg. Appreciate the response. Gary Lee -- 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
