On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 6:22 AM, ck raju ck.thrissur@gmail.com wrote:

If true, LibreOffice would be a nice name, a pretty good hack, a soft answer to corporates who think they can control Free Software and a fine piece of art at work.

Thanks to Glym moody for That Name Also take a look at 2 recent posts by him here <quote> So what's going on - why the sudden flood of forks? I think this indicates that we are entering a new phase in open source, and that the multi-year honeymoon for companies seeking to make money from free software is over.

Of course, making money from free software is perfectly legitimate, as Richard Stallman has emphasised many times. But that does not mean that such companies do not have responsibilities towards the coders and communities that support them. Moreover, simply abandoning software projects because they no longer fit into the latest flavour of corporate strategy is not a good way to win friends in the open source world. If such projects don't fit with that strategy, the solution is to help them to become independent, not simply to chuck them away like old boots.

</quote> http://blogs.computerworlduk.com/open-enterprise/2010/09/are-we-entering-the...

This means that over time, OpenOffice - sorry, LibreOffice - will become a patchwork of copyrights, just like the Linux kernel. The advantage is that no one will have control of the new project; the disadvantage is that major changes to licensing are very hard to effect (which is why Linux will probably never shift from using GNU GPLv2.) The main licence for the new code modules will be dual LGPLv3+ / MPL. http://blogs.computerworlduk.com/open-enterprise/2010/09/openofficeorg-disco...

-- CK Raju _______________________________________________ Fsf-friends mailing list Fsf-friends@mm.gnu.org.in http://mm.gnu.org.in/mailman/listinfo/fsf-friends

-- "[It is not] possible to distinguish between 'numerical' and 'nonnumerical' algorithms, as if numbers were somehow different from other kinds of precise information." - Donald Knuth