Andrew Ziem wrote: > "the fork" is under the LGPL... A fork is a fork, which they have had the freedom to fork OOo because OOo is under the LGPL. Just because their fork is also under the LGPL does not mean their is an obligation for the original to accept material from the fork.
Since the fork was made to include technically and legally undesirable components it would be a stupid move to accept tainted mods. And, no, auditing is not an option, the onus is not on the original team to be chasing a fork. That way leads to denial of service and burn out. If Meeks and others and Novell want to promote their fork, then fine, but they can quit causing trouble for OpenOffice.org and stay out of the way. regards, -Lars --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
