debian packages for 0.8.2 + CC licensing

Hi Robert,

I you visit
http://svn.debian.org/wsvn/pkg-openxchange/ox-d
evel/open-xchange/
you can see the progress of the packaging. 
Currently the package builds but there are issues to be
solved:

1. Find an OpenLDAP config that is secure enough and works.
   I think, that the current authentication mechanism has to
be
replaced
   by per user authentication to the LDAP server like in
that tutorial:
   http://java.sun.com/products/jndi/tutorial/lda
p/security/ldap.html

2. Get some feedback about the database migration script.
   http
://www.open-xchange.org/oxwiki/StableUpgrade

3. Licensing problem.
   The previous versions of Open-Xchange were under GPL
license. IMO it

   was perfect for both users and developers. The
Open-Xchange was a 
   protected trademark of Netline.

   The current stable version (0.8.2) of Open-Xchange is
under GPL and 
   Creative Commons (CC) license. Generally the code is
under GPL and 
   the web interface is under CC. Some problems of are
mentioned on
that
   page: http://
people.debian.org/~evan/ccsummary.html
   In short, the CC licenses do not meet with Debian Free 
   Software Guidelines (DFSG), they are not DFSG free. 

   The previous OX versions weren't DFSG free either, since
they depend

   on Sun's closed source JavaMail API implementation, but
there is a  
 
   project to make Open-Xchange work on free Java tools by
improving
the 
   available tools and patching Open-Xchange:
   http://ww
w.open-xchange.org/oxwiki/FreeJDKs
   After that project succeeds, Open-Xchange will become a 
   true, DFSG compliant Open Source Software.
   
   By releasing the 0.8.2 version under CC+GPL Netline made
that goal
   impossible without forking the source at the last GPL
version, RC3.
   Generally the web interface is CC licensed, the business
logic and  
   webdav interface is under GPL.
   Someone, who would like to keep OX a GPL software could
fork the 
   source tree at RC3, get the GPL part of 0.8.2, then fix
the web 
   interface to work with the new business logic. It's not
hard, since 
   there is no big difference between RC3 and 0.8.2.
   
   Remember XFree86? XFree86 developers changed the license
to a more 
   restricive one. The project forked, and now, we have the
new, shiny 
   X.org.

   I think Netline should keep GPL as the license of
Open-Xchange 
   Community Edition and rerelease 0.8.2 under GPL.

   Please send replies to generalopen-xchange.org to keep
the thread
on 
   one list.

Cheers,
Balint
   

--- Robert Penz <Robert.Penzhitt.at> wrote:

> Hi Balint!
> 
> whats your timeframe and way to use 0.8.2 for your
stable packages?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --
> 
> Robert Penz
> HITT - health information technologies tirol gmbh
> Tel: +43-512-576523 - 232
> Fax: +43-512-576523 - 70
> email: robert.penzhitt.at
> 
> "Windows Vista" is the abbreviation for
"Windows with Viruses,
> Instability, 
> Spyware, Trojans and Adware"
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> User mailing list
> Useropen-xchange.org
> http://www.open-xchange.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/us
er
> 



		
___________________________________________________________ 
To help you stay safe and secure online, we've developed
the all new Yahoo! Security Centre. http://uk.security.yahoo
.com

_______________________________________________
General mailing list
Generalopen-xchange.org
http://www.open-xchange.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo
/general

On Fri, 2006-04-28 at 00:37 +0100, Balint Reczey wrote:
> Hi Robert,
> 
> I you visit
> http://svn.debian.org/wsvn/pkg-openxchange/ox-d
evel/open-xchange/
> you can see the progress of the packaging. 
> Currently the package builds but there are issues to be
solved:
> 
> 1. Find an OpenLDAP config that is secure enough and
works.
>    I think, that the current authentication mechanism
has to be
>    replaced by per user authentication to the LDAP
server like in that tutorial:
>    http://java.sun.com/products/jndi/tutorial/lda
p/security/ldap.html

The sun.com stuff is problematic anyway, like you also
mention later.

> 2. Get some feedback about the database migration
script.
>    http
://www.open-xchange.org/oxwiki/StableUpgrade

Since i have no real running system i can't say anything
about it, i
just hack on getting it to run with gcj.

> 3. Licensing problem.
>    The previous versions of Open-Xchange were under GPL
license. IMO it
> 
>    was perfect for both users and developers. The
Open-Xchange was a 
>    protected trademark of Netline.
> 
>    The current stable version (0.8.2) of Open-Xchange
is under GPL and 
>    Creative Commons (CC) license. Generally the code is
under GPL and 
>    the web interface is under CC. Some problems of are
mentioned on
>    that page: http://
people.debian.org/~evan/ccsummary.html
>    In short, the CC licenses do not meet with Debian
Free 
>    Software Guidelines (DFSG), they are not DFSG free. 
> 
>    The previous OX versions weren't DFSG free either,
since they depend
> 
>    on Sun's closed source JavaMail API implementation,
but there is a  
>    project to make Open-Xchange work on free Java tools
by improving
>    the available tools and patching Open-Xchange:
>    http://ww
w.open-xchange.org/oxwiki/FreeJDKs
>    After that project succeeds, Open-Xchange will
become a 
>    true, DFSG compliant Open Source Software.

I got RC3 kind of running, with a bunch of hacks, including
using parts
of the apache directory server (for LDAP), special
classpathx version,
some additional ldapnaming stuff, lot of clean up to support
postgresql
8.x. But even if that all works, the biggest problem in my
eyes is
missing features like administration interface and mail
filtering
interface. And the PHP hacks i do not count, cause those add
just yet an
other scripting langauge with more security problems, i mean
true
integrated admin and filtering interfaces. 

>    By releasing the 0.8.2 version under CC+GPL Netline
made that goal
>    impossible without forking the source at the last
GPL version, RC3.
>    Generally the web interface is CC licensed, the
business logic and  
>    webdav interface is under GPL.
>    Someone, who would like to keep OX a GPL software
could fork the 
>    source tree at RC3, get the GPL part of 0.8.2, then
fix the web 
>    interface to work with the new business logic. It's
not hard, since 
>    there is no big difference between RC3 and 0.8.2.

Forking would mean new additions to the GPL version will be
GPL only.
That will mean Netline can not use those additions in their
commercial
non GPL version without making that commercial version
completely GPL.
On the other hand in general the community doesn't seem to
like to
assign copyright to Netline, the community doesn't even
like to assign
copyright to the FSF. So at the moment it seems the
"community" working
on Open-Xchange are all just employees from Netline, apart
from the
people that do testing and write bug reports, but i don't
think there is
much coding done on Open-Xchange from outside Netline ?

>    Remember XFree86? XFree86 developers changed the
license to a more 
>    restricive one. The project forked, and now, we have
the new, shiny 
>    X.org.

There are other projects where this happened too, like
Sourceforge->gforge, Mambo->joomla and in some respect
the old Qt
license produced GTK (and with that Gnome). And most of
those spin offs
went their own way and got their own fans, and some even got
a lot
better than the original. And sometimes projects get merged
again , like
with gcc and egc, and now gcc is stronger than ever. 

>    I think Netline should keep GPL as the license of
Open-Xchange 
>    Community Edition and rerelease 0.8.2 under GPL.

I think Netline should do what ever it thinks is best for
Netline 
That they made a large part of their software GPL is great,
but
sometimes the community also gets greedy and wants more. 
Of course the community can, as you mentioned, take the GPL
parts and
form a Free-Xchange version, if that is a good thing or not,
i don't
know. 

- Erwin



_______________________________________________
General mailing list
Generalopen-xchange.org
http://www.open-xchange.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo
/general

Hi!


> 2. Get some feedback about the database migration
script.
>    http://www.open-
xchange.org/oxwiki/StableUpgrade

I want to setup an new server as I can wait a week or two I
don't want
to setup 0.8.0 and than migrate to 0.8.2. what I have is an
test system
I used some weeks ago to evaluate ox. so should I just
upgrade to the
testing packages and a migration will be done? as its a test
system I
can verify if that works.


>    The current stable version (0.8.2) of Open- Xchange
is under GPL
and 
>    Creative Commons (CC) license. Generally the code is
under GPL and

>    the web interface is under CC. Some problems of are
mentioned on
> that
>    page: http://
people.debian.org/~evan/ccsummary.html
>    In short, the CC licenses do not meet with Debian
Free 
>    Software Guidelines (DFSG), they are not DFSG free. 

what part of the web interface is cc? as there are
alternative icons
and themes.

is it possible to just put the cc stuff into a non-free
package?


>    The previous OX versions weren't DFSG free either,
since they
depend
> 
>    on Sun's closed source JavaMail API implementation,
but there is a
 
>  
>    project to make Open- Xchange work on free Java
tools by
improving
> the 
>    available tools and patching Open- Xchange:
>    http://www.open-
xchange.org/oxwiki/FreeJDKs
>    After that project succeeds, Open- Xchange will
become a 
>    true, DFSG compliant Open Source Software.

about what timeframe are we talking here?


>    Remember XFree86? XFree86 developers changed the
license to a more

>    restricive one. The project forked, and now, we have
the new,
shiny 
>    X.org.

the difference is that I don't think the community is
strong enough in
this case to successfully fork.

>    I think Netline should keep GPL as the license of
Open- Xchange 
>    Community Edition and rerelease 0.8.2 under GPL.

that would have made it easier thats correct.


--

Robert Penz
HITT - health information technologies tirol gmbh
Tel: +43-512-576523 - 232
Fax: +43-512-576523 - 70
email: robert.penzhitt.at

"Windows Vista" is the abbreviation for
"Windows with Viruses,
Instability, 
Spyware, Trojans and Adware"


_______________________________________________
General mailing list
Generalopen-xchange.org
http://www.open-xchange.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo
/general

On Fri, 2006-04-28 at 09:07 +0200, Robert Penz wrote:

> >    The previous OX versions weren't DFSG free
either, since they depend
> >    on Sun's closed source JavaMail API
implementation, but there is a
> >    project to make Open- Xchange work on free Java
tools by improving the 
> >    available tools and patching Open- Xchange:
> >    http://www.open-
xchange.org/oxwiki/FreeJDKs
> >    After that project succeeds, Open- Xchange will
become a 
> >    true, DFSG compliant Open Source Software.
> 
> about what timeframe are we talking here?

Depending on the development community, what i did now was
just hacking
things. But if it is really made a public project things may
go a lot
faster because their could be more developers and testers.
But the
changes will be so big that this pretty much would mean a
fork of
Open-Xchange. 

> the difference is that I don't think the community is
strong enough in
> this case to successfully fork.

You never know, lot of developers might be interested when
it actually
runs on GCJ, since that would make it possible to include it
in most
linux distributions. 

> >    I think Netline should keep GPL as the license
of Open- Xchange 
> >    Community Edition and rerelease 0.8.2 under
GPL.
> 
> that would have made it easier thats correct.

Netline still wants the copyright assigned to them, so they
can
relicense the work for their commercial version. This
prevents the
addition of code from other projects like classpath, etc. So
no matter
if the whole thing is GPL or not, their still won't be much
of a
developer community, just a user community. 

- Erwin



_______________________________________________
General mailing list
Generalopen-xchange.org
http://www.open-xchange.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo
/general

On Apr 28, 2006 01:37 AM, Balint Reczey
<balint_reczeyyahoo.com> wrote:

> Hi Robert,
> 
> I you visit
> http://svn.debian.org/wsvn/pkg-openxchange/ox-d
evel/open-xchange/
> you can see the progress of the packaging. 
> Currently the package builds but there are issues to be
solved:
> 
> 1. Find an OpenLDAP config that is secure enough and
works.
>    I think, that the current authentication mechanism
has to be
> replaced
>    by per user authentication to the LDAP server like
in that tutorial:
>    http://java.sun.com/products/jndi/tutorial/lda
p/security/ldap.html
> 
> 2. Get some feedback about the database migration
script.
>    http
://www.open-xchange.org/oxwiki/StableUpgrade
> 
> 3. Licensing problem.
>    The previous versions of Open-Xchange were under GPL
license. IMO it
> 
>    was perfect for both users and developers. The
Open-Xchange was a 
>    protected trademark of Netline.
> 
>    The current stable version (0.8.2) of Open-Xchange
is under GPL and 
>    Creative Commons (CC) license. Generally the code is
under GPL and 
>    the web interface is under CC. Some problems of are
mentioned on
> that
>    page: http://
people.debian.org/~evan/ccsummary.html
>    In short, the CC licenses do not meet with Debian
Free 
>    Software Guidelines (DFSG), they are not DFSG free. 
> 
>    The previous OX versions weren't DFSG free either,
since they depend
> 
>    on Sun's closed source JavaMail API implementation,
but there is a  
>  
>    project to make Open-Xchange work on free Java tools
by improving
> the 
>    available tools and patching Open-Xchange:
>    http://ww
w.open-xchange.org/oxwiki/FreeJDKs
>    After that project succeeds, Open-Xchange will
become a 
>    true, DFSG compliant Open Source Software.
>    
>    By releasing the 0.8.2 version under CC+GPL Netline
made that goal
>    impossible without forking the source at the last
GPL version, RC3.
>    Generally the web interface is CC licensed, the
business logic and  
>    webdav interface is under GPL.
>    Someone, who would like to keep OX a GPL software
could fork the 
>    source tree at RC3, get the GPL part of 0.8.2, then
fix the web 
>    interface to work with the new business logic. It's
not hard, since 
>    there is no big difference between RC3 and 0.8.2.
>    
>    Remember XFree86? XFree86 developers changed the
license to a more 
>    restricive one. The project forked, and now, we have
the new, shiny 
>    X.org.
> 
>    I think Netline should keep GPL as the license of
Open-Xchange 
>    Community Edition and rerelease 0.8.2 under GPL.
> 
>    Please send replies to generalopen-xchange.org to keep
the thread
> on 
>    one list.
> 
> Cheers,
> Balint
>    
> 
> --- Robert Penz <Robert.Penzhitt.at> wrote:
> 
> > Hi Balint!
> > 
> > whats your timeframe and way to use 0.8.2 for your
stable packages?
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > --
> > 
> > Robert Penz
> > HITT - health information technologies tirol gmbh
> > Tel: +43-512-576523 - 232
> > Fax: +43-512-576523 - 70
> > email: robert.penzhitt.at
> > 
> > "Windows Vista" is the abbreviation
for "Windows with Viruses,
> > Instability, 
> > Spyware, Trojans and Adware"
> > 
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > User mailing list
> > Useropen-xchange.org
> > http://www.open-xchange.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/us
er
> > 
> 
> 
> 
> 		
>
___________________________________________________________ 
> To help you stay safe and secure online, we've
developed the all new Yahoo! Security Centre. http://uk.security.yahoo
.com
> 



Hi,

we changed the license to the CC because most (if not all)
HTML pages before SP1 were (and are still) copyrighted.
What do you think how copyrighted material fits into a
"free"
context?

Our intension to use Creative Commons Deed was not driven 
to cut down rights.

I want to encourage you to consider this in all of your
further actions.


With kind regards,

Martin Kauss




_______________________________________________
General mailing list
Generalopen-xchange.org
http://www.open-xchange.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo
/general

On Apr 28, 2006 12:12 PM, Erwin Rol <mailinglistserwinrol.com> wrote:

> On Fri, 2006-04-28 at 09:07 +0200, Robert Penz wrote:
> 
> > >    The previous OX versions weren't DFSG
free either, since they depend
> > >    on Sun's closed source JavaMail API
implementation, but there is a
> > >    project to make Open- Xchange work on free
Java tools by improving the 
> > >    available tools and patching Open-
Xchange:
> > >    http://www.open-
xchange.org/oxwiki/FreeJDKs
> > >    After that project succeeds, Open- Xchange
will become a 
> > >    true, DFSG compliant Open Source Software.
> > 
> > about what timeframe are we talking here?
> 
> Depending on the development community, what i did now
was just hacking
> things. But if it is really made a public project
things may go a lot
> faster because their could be more developers and
testers. But the
> changes will be so big that this pretty much would mean
a fork of
> Open-Xchange. 
> 
> > the difference is that I don't think the
community is strong enough in
> > this case to successfully fork.
> 
> You never know, lot of developers might be interested
when it actually
> runs on GCJ, since that would make it possible to
include it in most
> linux distributions. 
> 
> > >    I think Netline should keep GPL as the
license of Open- Xchange 
> > >    Community Edition and rerelease 0.8.2
under GPL.
> > 
> > that would have made it easier thats correct.
> 
> Netline still wants the copyright assigned to them, so
they can
> relicense the work for their commercial version. This
prevents the
> addition of code from other projects like classpath,
etc. So no matter
> if the whole thing is GPL or not, their still won't be
much of a
> developer community, just a user community. 
> 
> - Erwin
> 

Erwin,

i told this some times before: Our approach is no
"ideological" one.
We want to offer a fast, rich, usable, extensible and
helpful application.

If the classpath project (or any other) helps us to come
closer to our
vision and to our objectives we will use such libraries and
work
together with this projects. You wanted to start on this
issue when the
stable version is out and we had a conversation about this
topic some weeks
ago AFAIR. Let us see what we can achieve together.


Greetings,

Martin Kauss





_______________________________________________
General mailing list
Generalopen-xchange.org
http://www.open-xchange.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo
/general

Hey Martin,

On Sun, 2006-04-30 at 13:47 +0200, Martin Kauss wrote:

> i told this some times before: Our approach is no
"ideological" one.

But other peoples approach might be ideological, for example
the Debian
and Fedora people will not accept anything non Free (no
matter if it is
open source or not). Just look at the FDL license
"drama".

> We want to offer a fast, rich, usable, extensible and
helpful application.

And you do, no question about that.

> If the classpath project (or any other) helps us to
come closer to our
> vision and to our objectives we will use such libraries
and work
> together with this projects. 

To be honest classpath and co. (cause just classpath is not
enough to
make OX run) will make things a lot harder than just using
the Sun
libraries. And if I would be Netline I would not want to
waste time on
something that has no other advantage than a ideological
one.

> You wanted to start on this issue when the
> stable version is out and we had a conversation about
this topic some weeks
> ago AFAIR. Let us see what we can achieve together.

I am, I got the RC3 patches almost working with 0.8.2.  The
thing is I
would not mind if others would help, but I don't know how
to do that.
Open-Xchange.org does not really offer a development
community, and when
there is started something like a source forge project it is
pretty much
the same as forking. 

So is it possible for the community to enhance OX with GPL
code in an
open manner ? This could mean some ppl might add GPLed
features that
currently only the commercial version has, which could be
"bad" for
Netline. So maybe the question is simply, how will Netline
deal with an
active development community that only puts its code under
GPL without
assigning copyright to Netline.

MfG,

Erwin




_______________________________________________
General mailing list
Generalopen-xchange.org
http://www.open-xchange.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo
/general

--- Martin Kauss <bishophopen-xchange.org> wrote:

> On Apr 28, 2006 01:37 AM, Balint Reczey
<balint_reczeyyahoo.com>
> wrote:
> 
> > Hi Robert,
> > 
> > I you visit
> > http://svn.debian.org/wsvn/pkg-openxchange/ox-d
evel/open-xchange/
> > you can see the progress of the packaging. 
> > Currently the package builds but there are issues
to be solved:
> > 
> > 1. Find an OpenLDAP config that is secure enough
and works.
> >    I think, that the current authentication
mechanism has to be
> > replaced
> >    by per user authentication to the LDAP server
like in that
> tutorial:
> >   
> http://java.sun.com/products/jndi/tutorial/lda
p/security/ldap.html
> > 
> > 2. Get some feedback about the database migration
script.
> >    http
://www.open-xchange.org/oxwiki/StableUpgrade
> > 
> > 3. Licensing problem.
> >    The previous versions of Open-Xchange were
under GPL license.
> IMO it
> > 
> >    was perfect for both users and developers. The
Open-Xchange was
> a 
> >    protected trademark of Netline.
> > 
> >    The current stable version (0.8.2) of
Open-Xchange is under GPL
> and 
> >    Creative Commons (CC) license. Generally the
code is under GPL
> and 
> >    the web interface is under CC. Some problems of
are mentioned on
> > that
> >    page: http://
people.debian.org/~evan/ccsummary.html
> >    In short, the CC licenses do not meet with
Debian Free 
> >    Software Guidelines (DFSG), they are not DFSG
free. 
> > 
> >    The previous OX versions weren't DFSG free
either, since they
> depend
> > 
> >    on Sun's closed source JavaMail API
implementation, but there is
> a  
> >  
> >    project to make Open-Xchange work on free Java
tools by
> improving
> > the 
> >    available tools and patching Open-Xchange:
> >    http://ww
w.open-xchange.org/oxwiki/FreeJDKs
> >    After that project succeeds, Open-Xchange will
become a 
> >    true, DFSG compliant Open Source Software.
> >    
> >    By releasing the 0.8.2 version under CC+GPL
Netline made that
> goal
> >    impossible without forking the source at the
last GPL version,
> RC3.
> >    Generally the web interface is CC licensed, the
business logic
> and  
> >    webdav interface is under GPL.
> >    Someone, who would like to keep OX a GPL
software could fork the
> 
> >    source tree at RC3, get the GPL part of 0.8.2,
then fix the web 
> >    interface to work with the new business logic.
It's not hard,
> since 
> >    there is no big difference between RC3 and
0.8.2.
> >    
> >    Remember XFree86? XFree86 developers changed
the license to a
> more 
> >    restricive one. The project forked, and now, we
have the new,
> shiny 
> >    X.org.
> > 
> >    I think Netline should keep GPL as the license
of Open-Xchange 
> >    Community Edition and rerelease 0.8.2 under
GPL.
> > 
> >    Please send replies to generalopen-xchange.org to keep the
> thread
> > on 
> >    one list.
> > 
> > Cheers,
> > Balint
> >    
> > 
> > --- Robert Penz <Robert.Penzhitt.at> wrote:
> > 
> > > Hi Balint!
> > > 
> > > whats your timeframe and way to use 0.8.2 for
your stable
> packages?
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > --
> > > 
> > > Robert Penz
> > > HITT - health information technologies tirol
gmbh
> > > Tel: +43-512-576523 - 232
> > > Fax: +43-512-576523 - 70
> > > email: robert.penzhitt.at
> > > 
> > > "Windows Vista" is the
abbreviation for "Windows with Viruses,
> > > Instability, 
> > > Spyware, Trojans and Adware"
> > > 
> > > 
> > >
_______________________________________________
> > > User mailing list
> > > Useropen-xchange.org
> > > http://www.open-xchange.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/us
er
> > > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 		
> >
___________________________________________________________ 
> > To help you stay safe and secure online, we've
developed the all
> new Yahoo! Security Centre. http://uk.security.yahoo
.com
> > 
> 
> 
> 
> Hi,
> 
> we changed the license to the CC because most (if not
all)
> HTML pages before SP1 were (and are still) copyrighted.
> What do you think how copyrighted material fits into a
"free"
> context?
> 
> Our intension to use Creative Commons Deed was not
driven 
> to cut down rights.
> 
> I want to encourage you to consider this in all of your
> further actions.
> 
> 
> With kind regards,
> 
> Martin Kauss
> 

Hi Martin,

I thougth that the Open-Xchange software was released under
GPL. I read
the COPYING file, and i found the GPL license and nothing
else except
mentioning the OPEN-XCHANGE trademark of Netline GmbH and
third party
modules wich are out of scope since i don't use them to
build the
Debian packages.
Now I read the HTML templates and i found:

<html>
<head>
<meta name="DC.Relation" content="http://www.open-xchange.o
rg">
<meta name="DC.Creator"
content="Netline Internet Service GmbH">
<meta name="DC.Rights" content="(c)
Netline Internet Service GmbH. All
rights reserved.">
....

These meta tags are not shown to the users (and me). 
The "All rights reserved." incompatible with
GPL, since by releasing
something under GPL, you grant the right of modifying and
distributing
to others if they provide the source code of their
modifications.

Now I see, that the CC licensing is not for cutting down
rights, but it
made clear that the COPYING file is not written properly
since it does
not mention parts that are _not_ under GPL.
The COPYING file does not mention CC license in 0.8.2
either.
I assumed that it was not intentional, but please fix the
COPYING file 
because it may bewilder other people and they may think that
Open-Xchange Community edition is a GPL only software.

Cheers,
Balint


		
___________________________________________________________ 
Yahoo! Photos – NEW, now offering a quality print service
from just 7p a photo http://uk.photos.yahoo.com


_______________________________________________
General mailing list
Generalopen-xchange.org
http://www.open-xchange.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo
/general

--- Martin Kauss <bishophopen-xchange.org> wrote:

> On Apr 28, 2006 12:12 PM, Erwin Rol
<mailinglistserwinrol.com>
> wrote:
> 
> > On Fri, 2006-04-28 at 09:07 +0200, Robert Penz
wrote:
> > 
> > > >    The previous OX versions weren't
DFSG free either, since
> they depend
> > > >    on Sun's closed source JavaMail API
implementation, but
> there is a
> > > >    project to make Open- Xchange work on
free Java tools by
> improving the 
> > > >    available tools and patching Open-
Xchange:
> > > >    http://www.open-
xchange.org/oxwiki/FreeJDKs
> > > >    After that project succeeds, Open-
Xchange will become a 
> > > >    true, DFSG compliant Open Source
Software.
> > > 
> > > about what timeframe are we talking here?
> > 
> > Depending on the development community, what i did
now was just
> hacking
> > things. But if it is really made a public project
things may go a
> lot
> > faster because their could be more developers and
testers. But the
> > changes will be so big that this pretty much would
mean a fork of
> > Open-Xchange. 
> > 
> > > the difference is that I don't think the
community is strong
> enough in
> > > this case to successfully fork.
> > 
> > You never know, lot of developers might be
interested when it
> actually
> > runs on GCJ, since that would make it possible to
include it in
> most
> > linux distributions. 
> > 
> > > >    I think Netline should keep GPL as
the license of Open-
> Xchange 
> > > >    Community Edition and rerelease 0.8.2
under GPL.
> > > 
> > > that would have made it easier thats correct.
> > 
> > Netline still wants the copyright assigned to
them, so they can
> > relicense the work for their commercial version.
This prevents the
> > addition of code from other projects like
classpath, etc. So no
> matter
> > if the whole thing is GPL or not, their still
won't be much of a
> > developer community, just a user community. 
> > 
> > - Erwin
> > 
> 
> Erwin,
> 
> i told this some times before: Our approach is no
"ideological" one.
> We want to offer a fast, rich, usable, extensible and
helpful
> application.
> 
> If the classpath project (or any other) helps us to
come closer to
> our
> vision and to our objectives we will use such libraries
and work
> together with this projects. You wanted to start on
this issue when
> the
> stable version is out and we had a conversation about
this topic some
> weeks
> ago AFAIR. Let us see what we can achieve together.
> 
> 
> Greetings,
> 
> Martin Kauss

Hi Martin,

I understand that the ideological approach of Debian, Fedora
and other
distributions does not attract you.
If you want Open-Xchange to be included by those
distributions as a
free sofware, it has to be rereleased under a DFSG
compatible of OSI
approved license: http://www.openso
urce.org/licenses/ .
You may want Open-Xchange to be included, because you can
get a LOT of
users who want to buy OXLook licenses, support, and
documentation.

I think that Netline could make bigger money by opening the
source of
Open-Xchange, excluding OXLook, building a development
community around
and selling documentation, support and OXTenders to
proprietary
systems, like Outlook.
The development community could help you to make visions to
reality,
but now it is fragmented since Netline does not accept
patches.

Cheers,
Balint


		
___________________________________________________________ 
Switch an email account to Yahoo! Mail, you could win FIFA
World Cup tickets. http://uk.mail.yahoo.com

_______________________________________________
General mailing list
Generalopen-xchange.org
http://www.open-xchange.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo
/general

On Apr 30, 2006 03:31 PM, Erwin Rol <mailinglistserwinrol.com> wrote:

> Hey Martin,
> 
> On Sun, 2006-04-30 at 13:47 +0200, Martin Kauss wrote:
> 
> > i told this some times before: Our approach is no
"ideological" one.
> 
> But other peoples approach might be ideological, for
example the Debian
> and Fedora people will not accept anything non Free (no
matter if it is
> open source or not). Just look at the FDL license
"drama".
> 
> > We want to offer a fast, rich, usable, extensible
and helpful application.
> 
> And you do, no question about that.
> 
> > If the classpath project (or any other) helps us
to come closer to our
> > vision and to our objectives we will use such
libraries and work
> > together with this projects. 
> 
> To be honest classpath and co. (cause just classpath is
not enough to
> make OX run) will make things a lot harder than just
using the Sun
> libraries. And if I would be Netline I would not want
to waste time on
> something that has no other advantage than a
ideological one.
> 
> > You wanted to start on this issue when the
> > stable version is out and we had a conversation
about this topic some weeks
> > ago AFAIR. Let us see what we can achieve
together.
> 
> I am, I got the RC3 patches almost working with 0.8.2. 
The thing is I
> would not mind if others would help, but I don't know
how to do that.
> Open-Xchange.org does not really offer a development
community, and when
> there is started something like a source forge project
it is pretty much
> the same as forking. 
> 
> So is it possible for the community to enhance OX with
GPL code in an
> open manner ? This could mean some ppl might add GPLed
features that
> currently only the commercial version has, which could
be "bad" for
> Netline. So maybe the question is simply, how will
Netline deal with an
> active development community that only puts its code
under GPL without
> assigning copyright to Netline.
> 
> MfG,
> 
> Erwin
> 


Hi,

simple questions should be answered simple. We have a
concept for
this issue since the beginning. If you take a deeper look to
our
contribution model it should be clear:

http://www.open-xchange.org/oxwiki/contrib_2fSub
versionStructure

New code for the core engine can be submitted, but we will
build
it only into the core if we get a copyright assignment.
This is nothing unusual. OpenOffice and MySQL are dealing
the same
way with the community. 

For smaller projects and special interest communities we are
offering
space and repositories in our "Eve" and
"OXtension" SVN. And in this
areas you and others are invited to provide code under
whatever license
(of course you should take care about the law anyway) and
you do not
have to deal with copyright issues. 

Regards,

Martin Kauss





_______________________________________________
General mailing list
Generalopen-xchange.org
http://www.open-xchange.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo
/general