On Sat, Jun 11, 2011 at 1:36 PM, Ross Gardler wrote:
> Sent from my mobile device (so please excuse typos)
>
> On 11 Jun 2011, at 11:23, Simos Xenitellis wrote:
>
>> The part about the ASF undertaking only a reference implementation for
>> the ODF format
>> was not
On Sat, Jun 11, 2011 at 9:40 AM, Christian Grobmeier
wrote:
> Ketih,
>
>> I think Italo is incorrect saying voting "no" would be a defeat for
>> free software. It is an honest mistake. People don't know what else
>> could happen, because alternatives are not being discussed.
>
> They have been dis
> Please cast your votes:
>
> [ ] +1 Accept OpenOffice.org for incubation
> [ ] +0 Indifferent to OpenOffice.org incubation
> [ ] -1 Reject OpenOffice.org for incubation
>
-1 (non-binding)
This proposal is for the hosting of all OpenOffice.org services by the ASF,
and mandates for items such a
On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 6:17 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> Guys, if we are going to argue over the mistakes of the pasts
> and the slights of the past, quite frankly, we aren't going to
> get very far.
>
> This is supposed to be a happy occasion; let's not bicker
> and argue about who-killed-who... :)
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 6:39 PM, Richard S. Hall wrote:
> On 6/6/11 11:26, Simos Xenitellis wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 6:02 PM, Richard S. Hall
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 6/6/11 10:41, Manfred A. Reiter wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi Richar
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 6:02 PM, Richard S. Hall wrote:
> On 6/6/11 10:41, Manfred A. Reiter wrote:
>>
>> Hi Richard, *
>>
>> 2011/6/6 Richard S. Hall
>>>
>>> On 6/6/11 2:48, Phil Steitz wrote:
On 6/5/11 11:26 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
>
> On 6/6/2011 1:06 AM, Sanjiva Weerawa
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 3:37 AM, wrote:
> Simon Phipps wrote on 06/05/2011 07:49:41 PM:
>
>> From: Simon Phipps
>> To: general@incubator.apache.org
>> Date: 06/05/2011 07:50 PM
>> Subject: Re: OpenOffice: were are we now?
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 12:38 AM, Richard S. Hall
> wrote:
>>
>> >
>>
On Sat, Jun 4, 2011 at 1:31 PM, Jochen Wiedmann
wrote:
> Excuse me for interrupting ...
>
>
> On Sat, Jun 4, 2011 at 12:01 AM, wrote:
>
>> LibreOffice uses a dual license LGPLv3/MPL.
>
> I've been reading MPL a few times in this discussion. But neither
>
> http://www.libreoffice.org/download/
On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 5:52 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>
> On Jun 2, 2011, at 10:40 AM, robert_w...@us.ibm.com wrote:
>
>>
>> No one is forcing LibreOffice members to do anything. You are free to
>> disagree with my goals, my priorities or even my methods and simply say,
>> "No thanks" without sugg
