Cor Nouws wrote:
> Noel J. Bergman wrote (06-06-11 23:51)
>> Conclusion:
>>
>> "I do not believe the ASF is likely to provide a good home for the
>> OO.o project in the long run."
>>
>> Supporting statements:
>> [...]
>
> Supporting explanation ;-)
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-general/201106.mbox/%3c4de97e04.20...@nouenoff.nl%3E
So, "For me it is obvious that this statement is because there is strong
involvement in LibreOffice from people that do not want to work with
non-copyleft and Apache licence."
I agree; you draw the same inference that I do: he means that a non-copyleft
license is the reason for (predicted eventual) failure. That attitude is most
likely why (IMO) the "obvious" candidate wasn't used when Oracle decided to
transfer OpenOffice.
Licensing matters. IBM and others prefer an Open Source license, which allows
a level playing field, rather than the inequity of GPL+proprietary, but they
are not interested sharing everything.
--- Noel
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
