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

> Hi Robert,
> 
> I you visit
> http://svn.debian.org/wsvn/pkg-openxchange/ox-devel/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/ldap/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://www.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 general at open-xchange.org to keep the thread
> on 
>    one list.
> 
> Cheers,
> Balint
>    
> 
> --- Robert Penz <Robert.Penz at hitt.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.penz at hitt.at
> > 
> > "Windows Vista" is the abbreviation for "Windows with Viruses,
> > Instability, 
> > Spyware, Trojans and Adware"
> > 
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > User mailing list
> > User at open-xchange.org
> > http://www.open-xchange.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/user
> > 
> 
> 
> 
> 		
> ___________________________________________________________ 
> 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