On 07.06.2011 14:22, Mathias Bauer wrote:
On 07.06.2011 13:00, Nóirín Plunkett wrote:
On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 11:30 AM, Mathias Bauer
wrote:
If there was still too much concern about that, I could work on an
improved
list from a technical perspective and provide this list in a few days. I
don't
Andrew Rist wrote:
> I'll quote my earlier answer [1] on that:
> Our approach is to start with the main open source code - stuff with
> clear provenance. The OOo extensions are more complex in terms of
> licensing and other issues, but this is certainly something to revisit
> at a later stage of t
I'll quote my earlier answer [1] on that:
Our approach is to start with the main open source code - stuff with
clear provenance. The OOo extensions are more complex in terms of
licensing and other issues, but this is certainly something to revisit
at a later stage of the project.
(acknowledged
On 07/06/2011 Andrew Rist wrote:
> We are trying to provide all of the Oracle owned content in the OOo
> repositories.
As a longtime OpenOffice.org volunteer (mini-introduction: involved with
the OpenOffice.org project since 2003, main contributions in QA,
Localization and QA Tools, Italian Proje
On Wed, Jun 8, 2011 at 6:53 AM, Steve Loughran wrote:
>
> Now, the database with OOo is hsqldb, Java based, so assuming we want to run
> this on Apache Harmony, does the Java TCK becomes a test dependency of OOo?
No
- Sam Ruby
On 06/07/2011 06:08 PM, Andrew Rist wrote:
It is Oracle's intent to provide to ASF the files needed to build OOo,
taking into account licensing and ownership issues.
This includes binary artifacts such as the OOo artwork and translation
databases. I am following the discussions here closely,
and
On 08.06.2011 00:37, robert_w...@us.ibm.com wrote:
Greg Stein wrote on 06/07/2011 05:50:49 PM:
Besides the content Oracle owns, it seems we could just ask the other
owners
to give the CWS's to the ASF. I mean, really... *somebody* out there
holds
the copyright. We just have to determine w
On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 11:37 PM, wrote:
> Greg Stein wrote on 06/07/2011 05:50:49 PM:
>
> >
> > Besides the content Oracle owns, it seems we could just ask the other
> owners
> > to give the CWS's to the ASF. I mean, really... *somebody* out there
> holds
> > the copyright. We just have to deter
Greg Stein wrote on 06/07/2011 05:50:49 PM:
>
> Besides the content Oracle owns, it seems we could just ask the other
owners
> to give the CWS's to the ASF. I mean, really... *somebody* out there
holds
> the copyright. We just have to determine who, and then ask. Some
definite
> legwork, but
Besides the content Oracle owns, it seems we could just ask the other owners
to give the CWS's to the ASF. I mean, really... *somebody* out there holds
the copyright. We just have to determine who, and then ask. Some definite
legwork, but it seems doable.
On Jun 7, 2011 10:15 AM, "Simon Phipps" wr
Good to know, many thanks.
S.
On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 7:23 PM, Andrew Rist wrote:
> We are trying to provide all of the Oracle owned content in the OOo
> repositories.
>
> A.
>
>
>
> On 6/7/2011 10:14 AM, Simon Phipps wrote:
>
>> That's very helpful, thanks Andrew. Will Oracle also be providin
We are trying to provide all of the Oracle owned content in the OOo
repositories.
A.
On 6/7/2011 10:14 AM, Simon Phipps wrote:
That's very helpful, thanks Andrew. Will Oracle also be providing the
work-in-progress CWS[1] please?
Thanks
S.
[1] http://dl.dropbox.com/u/1792694/cws.ods
On T
That's very helpful, thanks Andrew. Will Oracle also be providing the
work-in-progress CWS[1] please?
Thanks
S.
[1] http://dl.dropbox.com/u/1792694/cws.ods
On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 6:08 PM, Andrew Rist wrote:
> It is Oracle's intent to provide to ASF the files needed to build OOo,
> taking in
It is Oracle's intent to provide to ASF the files needed to build OOo,
taking into account licensing and ownership issues.
This includes binary artifacts such as the OOo artwork and translation
databases. I am following the discussions here closely,
and I am collected all of the lists that are
On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 8:00 AM, Simon Phipps wrote:
>
> It seems entirely reasonable, though, to expect Oracle
> to provide a firm commitment that they will relicense any and all files in
> the repository that they own, including CWS. Sam, does the current
> commitment from Apache give that assura
On 07.06.2011 13:00, Nóirín Plunkett wrote:
On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 11:30 AM, Mathias Bauer wrote:
If there was still too much concern about that, I could work on an improved
list from a technical perspective and provide this list in a few days. I
don't claim to reach perfection, but the result
On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 12:52 PM, Mathias Bauer wrote:
> On 07.06.2011 12:37, Thorsten Behrens wrote:
>
>> Mathias Bauer wrote:
>>
>>> I don't think that this is really necessary *now*, as we can do that
>>> even better and more efficiently when we actually work on the code
>>> from the svn reposit
On 7 Jun 2011, at 13:06, Michael Stahl wrote:
> On 07/06/11 11:42, Christian Lippka wrote:
>> Am 07.06.2011 11:09, schrieb Thorsten Behrens:
>>
>>> If you re-read Christian's mail, the answer to both is "yes". And
>>> another remark: given the overall state of the code (~20 years of
>>> sedimenta
On 07/06/11 11:42, Christian Lippka wrote:
Hi Thorsten,
Am 07.06.2011 11:09, schrieb Thorsten Behrens:
Simon Brouwer wrote:
The real question is whether anything essential is missing that Oracle
can't supply and that is very difficult to replace.
If you re-read Christian's mail, the answer t
On 07.06.2011 12:37, Thorsten Behrens wrote:
Mathias Bauer wrote:
I don't think that this is really necessary *now*, as we can do that
even better and more efficiently when we actually work on the code
from the svn repository. It was promised that the needed files will
be provided once they are
On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 11:30 AM, Mathias Bauer wrote:
> If there was still too much concern about that, I could work on an improved
> list from a technical perspective and provide this list in a few days. I
> don't claim to reach perfection, but the result should be much closer to
> what we need.
Mathias Bauer wrote:
> I don't think that this is really necessary *now*, as we can do that
> even better and more efficiently when we actually work on the code
> from the svn repository. It was promised that the needed files will
> be provided once they are known. I'm confident that this will work
On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 12:01 AM, Ralph Goers wrote:
>
> On Jun 6, 2011, at 7:27 AM, Sam Ruby wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 10:02 AM, Christian Lippka wrote:
>>>
>>> While the technical analyze here seems (should not use that word) correct my
>>> understanding is that missing bits could still
Hi Thorsten,
Thorsten Behrens schreef:
> Simon Brouwer wrote:
>> The real question is whether anything essential is missing that Oracle
>> can't supply and that is very difficult to replace.
>>
> If you re-read Christian's mail, the answer to both is "yes".
Both? That was only one question, and C
Hi Thorsten,
Am 07.06.2011 11:09, schrieb Thorsten Behrens:
Simon Brouwer wrote:
The real question is whether anything essential is missing that Oracle
can't supply and that is very difficult to replace.
If you re-read Christian's mail, the answer to both is "yes". And
another remark: given t
On 07.06.2011 06:01, Ralph Goers wrote:
Sam, for me this is the only area where I question whether I will
vote for the proposal. From what I read in Christian Lohmaier's
summary Oracle has supplied about 50% of the OOo source code. His
summary ended with "Apache OOo is far from being able to de
Simon Brouwer wrote:
> The real question is whether anything essential is missing that Oracle
> can't supply and that is very difficult to replace.
>
If you re-read Christian's mail, the answer to both is "yes". And
another remark: given the overall state of the code (~20 years of
sedimentation),
Ralph Goers schreef:
>
> On Jun 6, 2011, at 7:27 AM, Sam Ruby wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 10:02 AM, Christian Lippka wrote:
>>>
>>> While the technical analyze here seems (should not use that word)
>>> correct my
>>> understanding is that missing bits could still be provided if
>>> request
Hi,
Le 7 juin 11 à 06:01, Ralph Goers a écrit :
It is my expectation that if we make reasonable requests and that if
those requests are within Oracle's power to fulfill those requests,
that we will obtain subsequent software grants.
Sam, for me this is the only area where I question whether I
On Jun 6, 2011, at 7:27 AM, Sam Ruby wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 10:02 AM, Christian Lippka wrote:
>>
>> While the technical analyze here seems (should not use that word) correct my
>> understanding is that missing bits could still be provided if requested. But
>> this must be answered by p
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 10:02 AM, Christian Lippka wrote:
>
> While the technical analyze here seems (should not use that word) correct my
> understanding is that missing bits could still be provided if requested. But
> this must be answered by people who are making the negotiations.
I'll share my
Am 06.06.2011 12:02, schrieb Christian Lohmaier
[...]
- Sam Ruby
raw numbers:
wc -l repo.lst sorted_ooo.lst
69076 repo.lst
39616 sorted_ooo.lst
So even calling this "seems to include the full repo" and that even
twice is either with malicious intent, or with no clue. Christian
Lippka real
32 matches
Mail list logo
