e when it could have made a difference. That option
>> is no longer available. Jean Weber is to be commended for the effort she
>> expended in providing that opportunity. The AOO Project did not exercise
>> the will or the capacity to take that avenue. And here we are, where w
inal tool/app/utility name in the code they
> release.
> >
> > It's just odd to see a fork reference the original in the code and
> directories...
> > Having so many references to openoffice in the code really seems to
> indicate a relationship or something.
> > A
;
> - Dennis
>
> -Original Message-----
> From: marcia wilbur
> Sent: Saturday, January 9, 2021 04:17
> To: doc@openoffice.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Question sent to ASF legal around using the old OOo documentation
>
> Of course, while in the libreoffi
been, as
time goes by.
- Dennis
-Original Message-
From: marcia wilbur
Sent: Saturday, January 9, 2021 04:17
To: doc@openoffice.apache.org
Subject: Re: Question sent to ASF legal around using the old OOo documentation
Of course, while in the libreoffice code last week, I did notice a
f the help files.
>
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Dennis Hamilton"
> To: doc@openoffice.apache.org
> Sent: Friday, January 8, 2021 10:02:50 PM
> Subject: RE: Question sent to ASF legal around using the old OOo documentation
>
> I believe GPL is still category X
doc@openoffice.apache.org
> Sent: Friday, January 8, 2021 10:02:50 PM
> Subject: RE: Question sent to ASF legal around using the old OOo documentation
>
> I believe GPL is still category X.
>
> The compatibility claim is not bi-directional. Apache-licensed code can be
> incor
ry 8, 2021 10:02:50 PM
Subject: RE: Question sent to ASF legal around using the old OOo documentation
I believe GPL is still category X.
The compatibility claim is not bi-directional. Apache-licensed code can be
incorporated in GPL-licensed software, it is the reverse that is not OK
gene
s how the chips fall, the only way to build off of the OpenOffice 3.2
documentation is in a non-ASF project.
- Dennis
-Original Message-
From: Jean Weber
Sent: Friday, January 8, 2021 16:58
To: doc@openoffice.apache.org
Subject: Re: Question sent to ASF legal around using the ol
I notice the stock reply, "It would be best if the project got
permission from the original owners of the content to relicense it
under a more friendly license."
As I'm sure Keith knows, that is not going to happen, because (a)
several of the original contributors to OOo docs will not agree; and
(
I have filed a question with ASF Legal seeking guidance on updating the
older OOo documentation. You can follow it at
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-552
Regards
Keith
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
10 matches
Mail list logo
