On 5 June 2011 18:47, William A. Rowe Jr. <wr...@rowe-clan.net> wrote:
> In general, I'm avoiding the messages which are entirely based on the > "one true license"... but I think there is one interesting point to be > raised here... > > But I don't see any licensing argument for LibreOffice to even try > to be the preeminent Windows or OS/X port of the software, since > by definition improving GPL works for a closed source operating > system is something of an oxymoron. It's worth pointing out that many of the LO people are not necessarily "religious" about the license. Most migrated from a situation where their software was on Windows in much bigger volume than Linux. (I'm not sure of the Linux/Windows balance of LO installations but its likely to be more towards Linux simply by pre-installation) They might decide to focus on GNU/Linux distros but that is really a matter for their community. One of the concerns is that the license issue could split the existing LO community since some might be unconcerned about working on AL code and others might not want to touch it. In a way the problem is because there will be differences of view on that and you either adopt code or you don't, you can't have a halfway compromise and keep a common code base. -- Ian Ofqual Accredited IT Qualifications (The Schools ITQ) www.theINGOTs.org +44 (0)1827 305940 The Learning Machine Limited, Reg Office, 36 Ashby Road, Tamworth, Staffordshire, B79 8AQ. Reg No: 05560797, Registered in England and Wales.
