Sublicensing and how it relates to the original source bits and contributions based on those bits is a complex issue. The license on those bits doesn't change simply because you slapped a different license on the work as a whole.
In any case I fail to see how this line of inquiry is of any benefit to anyone, so lets just drop it. ----- Original Message ---- > From: Keith Curtis <keit...@gmail.com> > To: general@incubator.apache.org > Sent: Sun, June 5, 2011 7:40:31 PM > Subject: Re: OpenOffice & LibreOffice > > > > > What are you talking about? You can relicense to your hearts content. You >just can't contribute it back under some other license otherwise user's >couldn't use it and then relicense it. If you can't grasp that concept then >there really is no point to further discussion. > > > > Joe Shafer wrote this: > ------ > I don't feel the need to debate software licensing with a GPL fan on an > apache.org list. Suffice it to say that I expect downstream projects > to respect the license, and sublicense it if necessary in a way that > doesn't invalidate our license. > ---- > > Seems like he is saying he doesn't want people to change the license > of Apache software. > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
