2011.06.03 18:52, toki rašė:
On 03/06/2011 06:30, Rimas Kudelis wrote:
What for? IANAL, but as far as I understand, Apache license allows *us*
to use OOo's code, perhaps even relicensing it under LGPL/MPL.
My point is that there will _not_ be any source code to use.
From the text I quoted in previous message and you deleted, it seemed
to me like your point was that OOo will just take and relicense LibO's
code under some proprietary EULA.
Also:
My point is that there will _not_ be any source code to use.
The worst case scenario IMO would be that there is no _new_ source code
to use, but IMO:
1) if old code is licensed under APL, this means we can relicense the
existing OOo code we have under LGPL/MPL, so our whole product would be
licensed consistently, which is good
2) I'm quite sure that no new code in OOo means the end of OOo, which
means there is more room for both LibO and Lotus Symphony to grow. Why
would that hurt?
Rimas
--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to l10n+help@libreoffice.org
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/www/l10n/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
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.