On Wed, Jun 8, 2011 at 6:51 AM, Norbert Thiebaud <nthieb...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 9:43 PM, Noel J. Bergman <n...@devtech.com> wrote: > > [...] their downstream code cannot be used. Hence, the best outcome > under the current licensing regime is for all core development to be > done here, and for TDF to be a downstream consumer. > > Just because you choose a particular license that does not make you > de-facto 'upstream'.
Noel is describing a fact: It there is going to be something like "upstream", it can only be an ASL licensed OO, not a LGPL'ed LO. What he misses (as quite a few others do, which is possibly why you are reacting angry) is a certain amount of sensibility that acknowledges that this fact is just as likely to cause a total split between LO and OO. Your reaction only goes to show that this sensibility is required: Such a split would be the worst thing to happen and it is something where LO would loose nothing (compared to the time before the proposal) but would have missed a chance to win. Jochen -- Capitalism is the astounding belief that the most wickedest of men will do the most wickedest of things for the greatest good of everyone. John Maynard Keynes (http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Keynes) --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
