Re: GNOME Office and OpenOffice (fwd)

[Sander Vesik <Sander Vesik ireland sun com>]

On Thu, 2 Nov 2000 rms greymalkin yi org wrote:

> On Thu, Nov 02, 2000 at 01:00:47AM +0000, Sander Vesik wrote:
> > Just for the record - I was talking about OO code. How Sun licences it's
> > code is up to Sun. I have no word in this. I just happen to like the
> > present setup. Nothing Sun could possibly do would affect how the code out
> > there is available.
> 
> Yes, but I thought the meaning of your phrase was: why shouldn't (the
> contributors) dual license their code?
> 

Contributors to what?

> If it's the original OO code, yes, I also agree Sun has the right to
> release it in whatever license it wants.
> 
> > > Why can't "parts of this software" (that meaning what I wrote in GPL
> > > alone) "can only be distributed under the GPL"? After all, I CAN
> > > include the license in any code, and it's THAT code that is GPL.
> 
> > No reason. It's yours. Do with it whatever you want.
> 
> ok, so there is no need for AbiWord contributors to dual license,
> since their portions of code can be used in GPL alone?
> 

Yes. Or no, if they want their code in OO, in which case the code needs to
be dual licenced as LGPL 2.1 & SISSL.

> hugs, rms
> 
> 

	Sander

OpenOffice Release Engineering / Dublin