On 7/4/11 8:46 AM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
No, I think "Freeware" (besides the typo in the corresponding link) must
be removed, since it goes against the stated policy (or to the closest
thing we have, i.e., RMS's statement on the website).
IANAL, but "freeware" is not a license, while we should only list
extensions with a free software license. People using a proprietary
license are - of course - free to use such a license, but we cannot
neither suggest nor promote their extensions on TDF web sites.
Personally, I don't see a reason to list proprietary extensions.
Software vendors developing proprietary extensions can promote them
through their web sites. We could, as a service to LibreOffice users,
link only proprietary extensions providing features not available with
free software extensions (although I'm not sure that this is a good idea).
Personally, again, I would state that we have a preference for copyleft
licenses vs permissive licenses - although the latter are free software
licenses - because I would like to avoid seeing the IBMs of the world
taking the code to develop a proprietary version without giving back to
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to email@example.com
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/website/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Impressum (Legal Info)
: 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