Open Office licensing

[Thomas Milne]

On Fri, Jun 3, 2011 at 11:09 AM, Lennart Sorensen <
lsorense-1wCw9BSqJbv44Nm34jS7GywD8/FfD2ys at public.gmane.org> wrote:

> On Thu, Jun 02, 2011 at 10:15:40PM -0400, Kyle Winkler wrote:
> >  I don't think this really matters.  The non-Oracle employed community,
> > along with all the Linux distros, are moving to Libreoffice.  OpenOffice
> > simply wasn't getting where it needed to go fast enough.  We'll see if
> > LibreOffice can fix this.
> >
> > If the Document Foundation people really want Oracle's new
> Apache-Licensed
> > contributions, they could try to move to the GPLv3, which Apache is
> > compatable with.  It would be difficult to do that with so many copyright
> > holders, but it might work of the code is compelling enough.
>
> The problem for Oracle of course is that they really want some of the
> LibraOffice MPL/GPL contributions which they can't have this way.
>
> Oracle really seems to be making huge mistakes in every decision they
> make.  Amazing.  They are acting like a spoiled child.  If things don't
> go their way and they eventually have to admit their way isn't working,
> they still have to go and spite everyone some more in the process.
>
> And given how much they don't like apache, this move just doesn't make
> any sense.
>
>
Yeah, I was reading that right now Oracle is demanding all e-mail
communications between Apache and Google. I guess Oracle thinks that Google
and Apache are ganging up and stealing Java (like someone would want to
steal a broken down Ford) for their Android project(s). Oracle only likes
the Apache license, it means they don't have to abide by the copyleft
provisions in GPL.

-- 
Thomas Milne
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://gtalug.org/pipermail/legacy/attachments/20110603/9b212513/attachment.html>