On 4 June 2011 13:30, Cor Nouws <oo...@nouenoff.nl> wrote: > Sam Ruby wrote (04-06-11 13:35) > > On Sat, Jun 4, 2011 at 6:24 AM, Andreas Kuckartz<a.kucka...@ping.de> >> wrote: >> > > If yes: which licenses would IBM be willing to consider ? >>> >> >> Is there any reason to believe that the Apache License, Version 2.0 is >> not an appropriate choice in this situation? >> > > Yes. As expressed by many on this list and elsewhere: the Apache license > policy does not match for at least part of the LibreOffice project. > So starting with finding a common ground first, rather than starting with > the Apache model, would have been a better approach, IMO. >
I'm not an expert in this but is seems to me that since you can derive a copy left licensed product from an Apache licensed product but not the other way round, it is in fact logical to start with Apache if both are to be considered. -- Ian Ofqual Accredited IT Qualifications The Schools ITQ www.theINGOTs.org +44 (0)1827 305940 You have received this email from the following company: The Learning Machine Limited, Reg Office, 36 Ashby Road, Tamworth, Staffordshire, B79 8AQ. Reg No: 05560797, Registered in England and Wales.
