On 1/2/13 8:32 PM, Italo Vignoli wrote:
> The problem at Apache OpenOffice is IBM with its attitude vs free
> software, which does not change with time. Apache OpenOffice is free
> software, althoug the presence of IBM behind the project - together with
> the permissive license - is scaring for vo
s@documentfoundation.org
Subject: RE: [tdf-discuss] LO vs AOO : GPL/LGPL vs ASL licences
On Mon, 2012-12-31 at 20:53 -0800, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
> I contribute to Alv2-licensed projects and I agree to the ASF rules
> for Apache committers. It satisfies me that anyone who receives code
&
On 1/2/13 6:59 PM, Immanuel Giulea wrote:
> LibreOffice is a true free libre open source software (FLOSS) whereas
> Apache's project is not recognized to be a free software by the Free
> Software Foundation.
Apache Software Foundation is definitely supporting free software, and
is one of the olde
on.org; Marketing; market...@us.libreoffice.org
Subject: Re: [tdf-discuss] LO vs AOO : GPL/LGPL vs ASL licences
Thank you everyone for your participation, it was of much enlightenment.
LibreOffice is a true free libre open source software (FLOSS) whereas
Apache's project is not recognized to be
Thank you everyone for your participation, it was of much enlightenment.
LibreOffice is a true free libre open source software (FLOSS) whereas
Apache's project is not recognized to be a free software by the Free
Software Foundation.
LibreOffice has received the backing from several commercial part
On 2 January 2013 16:00, Tanstaafl wrote:
> I think the most important distinction to an end user, aside from knowing
> that both allow them to *use* the software in any way they see fit -
> personal, commercial, etc, is that the LO project is able to benefit from
> AOO code, but AOO is not allow
I think the most important distinction to an end user, aside from
knowing that both allow them to *use* the software in any way they see
fit - personal, commercial, etc, is that the LO project is able to
benefit from AOO code, but AOO is not allowed to benefit from the LO code.
On 2013-01-01
On 12/31/2012 02:40 PM, Immanuel Giulea wrote:
In the marketing materials that I am writing covering LO vs AOO, I was
wondering if it would be relevant to go into an explanation about why the
GPL/LGPL licence used by LO was superior to the ASL as a "true open source".
An average user does not c
ode to be handled
> differently."
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Dennis E. Hamilton [mailto:dennis.hamil...@acm.org]
> Sent: Monday, December 31, 2012 20:54
> To: 'webmaster-Kracked_P_P'; discuss@documentfoundation.org
> Subject: RE: [tdf-discuss] LO vs
cumentfoundation.org
Subject: RE: [tdf-discuss] LO vs AOO : GPL/LGPL vs ASL licences
I think Immanuel's question about what are the differences for users is more
important.
With regard to technicalities:
It happens that ASF projects do not accept GPL/LGPL code into their code bases.
Perio
tributors. Some end users may want to express
> their allegiance to one model or the other. In cultivating such allegiance,
> it is valuable to stick to the facts.
>
> - Dennis
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: webmaster-Kracked_P_P [mailto:webmas...@krackedpress
t: Monday, December 31, 2012 12:19
To: discuss@documentfoundation.org
Subject: Re: [tdf-discuss] LO vs AOO : GPL/LGPL vs ASL licences
[ ... ]
As I was told, LO's license will allow the developer to own the coding
they are sharing with the project, where AOO's really will give that
project the ownership
d users. It does
> have ideological importance to contributors. Some end users may want to
> express their allegiance to one model or the other. In cultivating such
> allegiance, it is valuable to stick to the facts.
>
> - Dennis
>
>
> -Original Message-----
> From
ating such allegiance, it
is valuable to stick to the facts.
- Dennis
-Original Message-
From: webmaster-Kracked_P_P [mailto:webmas...@krackedpress.com]
Sent: Monday, December 31, 2012 12:19
To: discuss@documentfoundation.org
Subject: Re: [tdf-discuss] LO vs AOO : GPL/LGPL vs ASL lice
On 12/31/2012 02:40 PM, Immanuel Giulea wrote:
Hello all,
In the marketing materials that I am writing covering LO vs AOO, I was
wondering if it would be relevant to go into an explanation about why the
GPL/LGPL licence used by LO was superior to the ASL as a "true open source".
I found this gr
15 matches
Mail list logo
