You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@openoffice.apache.org by "Dennis E. Hamilton" <de...@acm.org> on 2011/06/22 04:20:13 UTC
Licensing odma.h (was RE: Some more strange files in the OOo code - the Ghost of ODMA Past)
The ODMA Support showed up in the Novell editions of OpenOffice.org.
I don't think the copyright notice in odma.h should be a problem. What is missing is any additional information about the license. Also not sure why you need it if there is no code that uses it in the base distribution.
If you want, I am sure I can make an updated version of the file, clear it with Betsy Fanning at AIIM (although that BSD-style license is meant to apply to all current code), and post an updated odma.h on the web site.
Is that useful or would I be wasting my time?
- Dennis
-----Original Message-----
From: Kai Sommerfeld [mailto:kai.sommerfeld@gmx.de]
Sent: Tuesday, June 21, 2011 02:50
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: Some more strange files in the OOo code - the Ghost of ODMA Past
Hi,
as far as I can tell LibreOffice does include ODMA support (the code
from ucb module plus patches here and there, inluding special file
dialogs and the like), vanilla OpenOffice.org as it can be downloaded
from download.openoffice.org definitely never did. The former speaks for
not completely removing ODMA files, just to "ban" odma.h from the ucb
source module.
I agree that improving WebDAV and introducing CMIS support should have
higher priority than fixing ODMA.
- Kai.
On 21.06.11 11:19, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
> Oh dear, my past comes along to haunt me.
>
> If you go to the home page, http://odma.info, you'll see that the other Downloads link is to ODMA License 1.0 (modeled on the BSD License). If you look in the lower right hand corner of the license page, you'll know why I should be hiding behind the sofa.
>
[ ... ]
RE: Licensing odma.h (was RE: Some more strange files in the OOo code - the Ghost of ODMA Past)
Posted by "Dennis E. Hamilton" <de...@acm.org>.
OK, since there is apparently no dependency on odma.h, I am not going to do anything. When someone has a dependency, I'm available.
- Dennis
-----Original Message-----
From: Kai Sommerfeld [mailto:kai.sommerfeld@gmx.de]
Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2011 02:16
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: Licensing odma.h (was RE: Some more strange files in the OOo code - the Ghost of ODMA Past)
Hi,
On 22.06.11 11:09, Mathias Bauer wrote:
> Hi Dennis,
>
> On 22.06.2011 04:20, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
>> The ODMA Support showed up in the Novell editions of OpenOffice.org.
>>
>> I don't think the copyright notice in odma.h should be a problem.
>> What is missing is any additional information about the license.
>> Also not sure why you need it if there is no code that uses it in the
>> base distribution.
>>
>> If you want, I am sure I can make an updated version of the file,
>> clear it with Betsy Fanning at AIIM (although that BSD-style license
>> is meant to apply to all current code), and post an updated odma.h on
>> the web site.
>>
>> Is that useful or would I be wasting my time?
> From the view of the "old" OOo project ODMA integration is not built,
> but at least a downstream version of OOo is using it. So we should not
> drop it. Thus enabling us to use a "clean" header would be appreciated.
>
+1
> My suggestion is as follows: we don't need to wait for odma.h, for the
> time being we just don't take it with us. If you provide us with a file
> with a suitable license, we can add it later.
>
+1, this makes perfect sense.
- Kai.
> Regards,
> Mathias
>
Re: Licensing odma.h (was RE: Some more strange files in the OOo
code - the Ghost of ODMA Past)
Posted by Kai Sommerfeld <ka...@gmx.de>.
Hi,
On 22.06.11 11:09, Mathias Bauer wrote:
> Hi Dennis,
>
> On 22.06.2011 04:20, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
>> The ODMA Support showed up in the Novell editions of OpenOffice.org.
>>
>> I don't think the copyright notice in odma.h should be a problem.
>> What is missing is any additional information about the license.
>> Also not sure why you need it if there is no code that uses it in the
>> base distribution.
>>
>> If you want, I am sure I can make an updated version of the file,
>> clear it with Betsy Fanning at AIIM (although that BSD-style license
>> is meant to apply to all current code), and post an updated odma.h on
>> the web site.
>>
>> Is that useful or would I be wasting my time?
> From the view of the "old" OOo project ODMA integration is not built,
> but at least a downstream version of OOo is using it. So we should not
> drop it. Thus enabling us to use a "clean" header would be appreciated.
>
+1
> My suggestion is as follows: we don't need to wait for odma.h, for the
> time being we just don't take it with us. If you provide us with a file
> with a suitable license, we can add it later.
>
+1, this makes perfect sense.
- Kai.
> Regards,
> Mathias
>
Re: Licensing odma.h (was RE: Some more strange files in the OOo
code - the Ghost of ODMA Past)
Posted by Mathias Bauer <Ma...@gmx.net>.
Hi Dennis,
On 22.06.2011 04:20, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
> The ODMA Support showed up in the Novell editions of OpenOffice.org.
>
> I don't think the copyright notice in odma.h should be a problem.
> What is missing is any additional information about the license.
> Also not sure why you need it if there is no code that uses it in the
> base distribution.
>
> If you want, I am sure I can make an updated version of the file,
> clear it with Betsy Fanning at AIIM (although that BSD-style license
> is meant to apply to all current code), and post an updated odma.h on
> the web site.
>
> Is that useful or would I be wasting my time?
From the view of the "old" OOo project ODMA integration is not built,
but at least a downstream version of OOo is using it. So we should not
drop it. Thus enabling us to use a "clean" header would be appreciated.
My suggestion is as follows: we don't need to wait for odma.h, for the
time being we just don't take it with us. If you provide us with a file
with a suitable license, we can add it later.
Regards,
Mathias