On 6 June 2011 17:12, Niclas Hedhman <nic...@hedhman.org> wrote: Was it already at that time known that Oracle was going with a liberal > license, and the fork was then a choice based in the ideological > differences in licensing? > > If it was not, how would the people who forked then have reacted if > Oracle did then (pre-fork) what they are doing now? >
First question - probably not but if so it was a well kept secret! Second question already asked and I think the answer depends on individuals. Some people are committed copylefters, others aren't. Finally, do you (TDF) thinks it is better that Oracle gives the > codebase, trademarks and other IP-rights to IBM than to Apache? The > way I read the situation, that is the alternative available most > likely to happen in that case, possibly as a fully internal project. > Giving OOo to TDF is something Oracle simply can't do, there is likely > a promise to IBM... > Certainly I have tried to point out that if Apache did not accept the code it could end up being a worse rather than better scenario. Recent thinking seems to be that the code could end up as an unsupported tarball in an Apache repository open to anyone. Depends on whether the final code is actually buildable when all the dust settles. I think it probably will be but there are a lot of unknowns in this so its an educated guess at best.
