Michael Meeks wrote:
The Document Foundation (as/when it exists) being your
'proxy' for future versions ?
Even though I'm not personally involved, this seems to be an interesting
suggestion, although as Kevin noticed it could become similar to
copyright assignments/agreements - which have been refused by The
Document Foundation since day one, but are not inherently bad in my
opinion: see my early comments at
http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/msg00533.html
I still tend to
(for all its faults) think that a plus license has some real strengths
for future re-licensing.
Well, in the current situation LibreOffice will have to use LGPL3 until
it has got rid of the OpenOffice.org code, which is not feasible nor
desirable for the time being. Unless of course Oracle change their
mind... But I guess this discussion would quickly outgrow the legal
considerations one is allowed to make on a developers' mailing list!
Best regards,
Andrea Pescetti.
Context
Privacy Policy |
Impressum (Legal Info) |
Copyright information: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images
on this website are licensed under the
Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License.
This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is
licensed under the Mozilla Public License (
MPLv2).
"LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are
registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are
in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective
logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use
thereof is explained in our
trademark policy.