LibreOffice Portable now runs from paths with spaces

[JohnTHaller]

Don't tell to us, please send your grievance to SourceForge, the owner of the repository

It's your responsibility (actually your requirement under the GPL) to link to the source code in a clear manner from your website, not SourceForge's. They provide a repository but it's up to you to organize it and clearly link to things so your users can find it. We use SVN and Mercurial on SourceForge at PortableApps.com and we're able to link to sections within both those source management tools directly (example: Toucan's homepage links to this).

No one call you "liar" since now, so do not accuse anyone please.

If you re-read Danix's response:

Please, take the time to search in our repository before making a false statement! The JavaGet code is on SVN since 21 months, you have just to search it. As well as all our code, as I have said many times. Since someone does not want to understand this, I repeat again. So, please, stop to denigrate winPenPack with false statements. Your constant annotations on our license start to get boring.

You don't need to say the actual word 'liar' to be calling someone a liar. And those harsh words came about just from me pointing out that it "seems like" the source code isn't available (because it's very hard to find).

[zandet2]

I quote again what you write:

And there is no search facility available for your repository on the page.

If there is no search facility on that page is not our fault, is a SourceForge responsability; if they have some prerequisite on their rules, is their job to offer the right functionalities on their tools. So again, plese refer to the technical staff of SourceForge website to have the search option on the SubVersion browse.

About the "liar" word, you use that world, not us, even if you "read" it in double or third meanings.
"Hard to find" is totally different from "remedy WinPenPack's GPL violation by hosting the source code (...) as well as releasing the source code for Java Get as required by the SourceForge.net terms of service.".
Your words, not mine.

And at the end, if you have some doubt about we carry on our project, you can write your remonstration directly on our pages; there we can do our best to give the right support.

So please keep here the discussions on technical level, do not shift every time on the legal level. This is PortableFreeware.com forum, not GPLLawyer.org; all of us are using too much spaces (and patience of the admins) here.

Best regards
zandet2

[JohnTHaller]

If there is no search facility on that page is not our fault, is a SourceForge responsability; if they have some prerequisite on their rules, is their job to offer the right functionalities on their tools. So again, plese refer to the technical staff of SourceForge website to have the search option on the SubVersion browse.

Providing easy access to the code is your responsibility, not SourceForge's. You choose to host there. You choose to use their tools. If where you have chosen to place the source code is difficult for users to find, it's your responsibility to remedy that.

About the "liar" word, you use that world, not us, even if you "read" it in double or third meanings.
"Hard to find" is totally different from "remedy WinPenPack's GPL violation by hosting the source code (...) as well as releasing the source code for Java Get as required by the SourceForge.net terms of service.".

WinPenPack is demonstrably violating the GPL by distributing LibreOffice and refusing to also distribute the source code. Which is a valid and factual point. You can twist words all you like, but it doesn't change the truth of that.

The second part of the statement is out of the context of where I said it "seems" like you aren't hosting the source code to Java Get and that should be remedied to abide by SourceForge's terms of service. I was able to find it myself by blindly stumbling around your repository and admitted the fact that it is there. You still should remedy the fact that it is hard to find and no clear instructions for finding it are provided.

Accusing someone of making false statements as Danix did is accusing someone of lying. This is by the dictionary definition of liar and lie. When I said it seems like the source isn't available, Danix could have easily provided a link to it here and updated the page X-LibreOffice page to point out where it was, admitting that it wasn't provided as a link and was hard to find. Instead, he accused me of making false statements and somehow denigrating WinPenPack. He chose that path of attack, not me.

And at the end, if you have some doubt about we carry on our project, you can write your remonstration directly on our pages; there we can do our best to give the right support.

I have no interest in registering on your site. I've made you aware of your violations.

So please keep here the discussions on technical level, do not shift every time on the legal level. This is PortableFreeware.com forum, not GPLLawyer.org; all of us are using too much spaces (and patience of the admins) here.

I'll be happy to take it up with SourceForge and Oracle instead of you prefer I go that route. I thought you'd appreciate the ability to fix your violations of the GPL and Oracle's trademark policy rather than receiving a second warning from SourceForge and a cease and desist letter from Oracle.

Open source is about cooperating for the good of all. The rules are laid out to ensure people do that. They're simple to understand and very easy to follow. I still don't understand why you won't just upload the source for all the apps you distribute as required.

[zandet2]

Again Mr. Haller,
if you are not interested to register on our site because Hic sunt leones, or because there you cannot give enough visibility to promote your project against our project?

Are you a lawyer? In a license you have to follow only what there is write inside, not the faq or the interpretations. Is the law, not "your" rule.

If you are interested in "cooperating for the good of all" come in our forum and help us with your experience to resolve the violating.
JavaGet is violating the Oracle license name? We can rename in JGet and change the icons, and the solution is founded.
Why you bother an entire forum with your legal obsession. Go to winpenpack.com and discuss it with us there, is the right place, not this forum.

Sorry, I don't understand you anymore.

[zandet2]

I'll be happy to take it up with SourceForge and Oracle instead of you prefer I go that route. I thought you'd appreciate the ability to fix your violations of the GPL and Oracle's trademark policy rather than receiving a second warning from SourceForge and a cease and desist letter from Oracle.

This is clearly a menace.

Not the right way to cooperate.

Sorry, but if you bring the discussion at this level I'm not interested to discuss with you anymore.

[JohnTHaller]

if you are not interested to register on our site because Hic sunt leones, or because there you cannot give enough visibility to promote your project against our project?

I've already pointed out your violations and how you can remedy them. I'm not sure what would be gained in my registering for your site. I'm also unsure how pointing out your license and trademark issues and suggesting simple and free ways to fix them and bring yourself into compliance is somehow promoting my project.

Are you a lawyer? In a license you have to follow only what there is write inside, not the faq or the interpretations. Is the law, not "your" rule.

I was simply paraphrasing what I was told by Oracle's lead counsel and the FSF advisor I worked with previously in an attempt to assist you. The rules are very clearly laid out and very easy to follow. I'm still confused by your stubborn refusal to follow them.

If you are interested in "cooperating for the good of all" come in our forum and help us with your experience to resolve the violating.

I offered up my advice based on our own experiences and was accused of lying and argued with that I was interpreting Oracle's trademark policy wrong after it was explained to me directly by Oracle's lawyers by 3 different representatives of the WinPenPack project. I don't think I'd care to experience more of that.

JavaGet is violating the Oracle license name? We can rename in JGet and change the icons, and the solution is founded.

JGet is in use. You'll need to choose a name no one else is using. But yes, you need to rename it without using any Oracle trademarks in the name nor using the Java logo in any way associated with it as I already explained to Danix. He refused and he said I was wrong and you didn't need to change it, though.

This is clearly a menace. Not the right way to cooperate. Sorry, but if you bring the discussion at this level I'm not interested to discuss with you anymore.

When I take the time to explain to you what you're doing improperly and how to (simply and freely) fix it... and you refuse to fix it and accuse me of lying, what would you suggest? You're clearly not interested in taking the advice. Since Danix is 100% sure I'm wrong on the Java trademark issue, having Oracle contact you and explain it would seem to be the only way to convince you. Since you think you don't need to distribute the source code for the apps you distribute, having SourceForge contact you again and remind you that you do would seem to be the only way to convince you. I'm unsure how else I can assist you given the harsh responses I've already gotten from WinPenPack in this thread. Rather than continuing to argue or make accusations, why don't you just remedy your violations? It would take less time.

Side Note For Everyone Else: Much as I'm sure everyone would enjoy further drama /SARCASM, I'm going to end my participation in this thread. I think I've made my point about the violations (as well as the solutions) and I don't think anyone is well served by a "yes it is" "no it isn't" style argument. Besides, we've got lots of new apps and platform features to release, so I've got development to do!

[webfork]

I'll be happy to take it up with SourceForge and Oracle instead of you prefer I go that route. I thought you'd appreciate the ability to fix your violations of the GPL and Oracle's trademark policy rather than receiving a second warning from SourceForge and a cease and desist letter from Oracle.

There are more despicable and open violations of the GPL and intellectual property than the WinPenPack project hosting the code on SourceForge. Lets keep those $200/hour lawyers working on something of genuine menace.

This is PortableFreeware.com forum, not GPLLawyer.org; all of us are using too much spaces (and patience of the admins) here.

Yeah its sort of a flame war, but do I think other competing software communities are similar. When the reason people are contributing their time and energy is to some extent simple pride, you're going to get this sort of response. I'm not sure the participants are enjoying it, but I've picked up a few things.

Please, take the time to search in our repository before making a false statement!

I clearly said "doesn't seem" as when I checked I found no reference to the JavaGet sourcecode on the X-LibreOffice download page nor in the X-LibreOffice readme included about where to obtain the source code other than WinPenPack's website and project and I did not see any reference to it there.

Cool. Danix: I apologize for saying you weren't hosting the source. Would you please create a direct link somewhere on the JavaGet page to the source? I don't care if its in the license or not, its just convenient. Thanks.

[Taf]

Accusing someone of making false statements as Danix did is accusing someone of lying. This is by the dictionary definition of liar and lie.

Dear Mr Haller,
why so angry? words can be read and understand as you will:
Dictionary definitions
False -> "not Correct"
Statement -> "something that someone says or writes officially, or an action done to express an opinion"

Your false statements are not lies. You made those "false statements" because at that time you were a bit ill-informed about real situation. So keep my "paraphrasis" as a sort of final explanation (excuses are NOT needed).
with my Regards.

Side Note: I'm going to end my participation in this thread too. IMHO, we all are wasting time can be much better used on real improving of portable/X proggies

[zandet2]

JavaGet is violating the Oracle license name? We can rename in JGet and change the icons, and the solution is founded.

JGet is in use. You'll need to choose a name no one else is using. But yes, you need to rename it without using any Oracle trademarks in the name nor using the Java logo in any way associated with it as I already explained to Danix. He refused and he said I was wrong and you didn't need to change it, though.

Let me laugh please. That was just an example, I can wrote JportableGet if I want to continue the flame.
We are in a forum, not in a society board, so don't be picky for every single word wrote.

Goodbye
zandet2

[SYSTEM]

And at the end, if you have some doubt about we carry on our project, you can write your remonstration directly on our pages; there we can do our best to give the right support.

So please keep here the discussions on technical level, do not shift every time on the legal level. This is PortableFreeware.com forum, not GPLLawyer.org; all of us are using too much spaces (and patience of the admins) here.

Best regards
zandet2

I am happy that there is a theoretically neutral forum where both PA.c and WPP people can discuss and trust that they won't get banned by the other project.

In addition, flamewars are not disallowed here. As long as one doesn't last too long and the posts aren't too rude, I think the moderators won't become too impatient.

[webfork]

I am happy that there is a theoretically neutral forum where both PA.c and WPP people can discuss and trust that they won't get banned by the other project.

Agreed. Although I think that both parties appear to have left the proverbial table on this one, I have already benefited from this and other discussions. At the very least, I'm happy to have some of the WPP project involved to some extent in the process.

In addition, flamewars are not disallowed here. As long as one doesn't last too long and the posts aren't too rude, I think the moderators won't become too impatient.

I'd like to think the line is openly and obviously trolling (frequent, lengthy, provocative, opaque statements) or the abusive ad hominem. However, this is Andrew's forum and he's encouraged a hands-off approach.

[Danix]

First of all, let me clarify English is my second language, maybe that's why my manner seemed so hard. Furthermore, it is quite difficult for us to speak fluently with you. If I offended anybody, I apologize.

As I already said very often, I explained our intention has always been to be compliant with all licenses. This is widely proved by the fact that SourceForge hosts all sources of programs we distribute with winPenPack suites. winPenPack 3.6 https://sourceforge.net/projects/winpen ... urces/3.6/ (163 Items - programs + launchers), winPenPack 4.0 https://sourceforge.net/projects/winpen ... /Programs/ (programs) https://sourceforge.net/projects/winpen ... Launchers/ (launchers), our repository http://winpenpack.svn.sourceforge.net/v ... inpenpack/ (approximately 350 X-Software + winPenPack Menu + X-Launcher + Our utilities). Anyway, by our oversight, LibreOffice source code (the sources of ONE program, against a huge number of items correctly inserted) was missed, but at least a link to them was present. Now also the LibreOffice sources are directly available.

IMHO, the main point is instead another. I had the feeling JohnTHaller, having no other valid argument and absolutely wanting to find something wrong or not legal in our project, is pointing out, once again, to any our smallest deficiency. We too, if wishing, could be able to search and maybe find, something not in compliance in PA project (Google Trademarks policy, for example?). Anyway I think will be the Owner's responsibility to notify any possible issue, not mine. Another example: JohnTHaller told us that all PA sources of PortableApps.com are easy to find. I could say that it "seems" OpenOffice.org source code is not available (the truth is, from this page, http://portableapps.com/apps/office/ope ... ad_details sourcecode link points to http://sourceforge.net/projects/portabl ... 0Portable/). But, obviously, I know this forum is not the right place to discuss anything in order to discredit PortableApps.com.

I'm pretty sure in our project there are many things can be improved. But we wish that all possible suggestions or warnings could be reported directly to us, and not on a "third party" forum. And if anyone really wants to help us here, could report possible issues via private messages or e-mail, not by reporting "off-topics" in a technical discussion like this. My personal thought is everyone should take care of his project, eventually using energy and time to fight against projects that really (not "seem to") violates licenses and trademarks (such http://portableappz.[removed].com/). Why no problems at all about that?

In addition, I think, just because "someone" is affirming it, is unfair to assume, without really check our sources folders, that winPenPack is not following licenses and not hosting source code. As already said, we try to do our best to respect them. Further, currently we are better reorganizing our SourceForge distribution, to avoid this kind of complaint from anyone.

Said that, if we are still welcome in this forum, although for us it is really challenging and difficult to speak and write fluently with you, we'd love to have a minimum of trust and consideration, and not to be attacked every time for any slightest issue, or because someone thinks we violating licenses and trademarks. This is the kind of dialog that we would have with everyone.

[webfork]

currently we are better reorganizing our SourceForge distribution, to avoid this kind of complaint from anyone.

Great news, thanks.

Said that, if we are still welcome in this forum, although for us it is really challenging and difficult to speak and write fluently with you, we'd love to have a minimum of trust and consideration, and not to be attacked every time for any slightest issue, or because someone thinks we violating licenses and trademarks. This is the kind of dialog that we would have with everyone.

I certainly appreciate you making the effort to use a non-native language. Its hard enough to put ideas together on a topic you feel strongly about. Its even harder to translate those ideas with clarity and impact. My Italian is far worse than your English so I cannot do you the same courtesy.

Still, I hope that PFW is doing a service to the community by facilitating a discussion, though it may be strongly worded. I think transparency on this issue is a good thing and that problems brought up in a public way can also be solved in a public way. For example, this situation has made it clear that WPP is an active and lively project with many advocates. I found out a lot about your project while looking for the source. I think this is a good thing.

... using energy and time to fight against projects that really (not "seem to") violates licenses and trademarks (such http://portableappz.------.com/). Why no problems at all about that?

I'm proud to say that I and members of this community have gone after the author of that site many times. Especially Ruby, who found out about his coglionate in a thread that's been deleted.

[Hydaral]

Another example: JohnTHaller told us that all PA sources of PortableApps.com are easy to find. I could say that it "seems" OpenOffice.org source code is not available (the truth is, from this page, http://portableapps.com/apps/office/ope ... ad_details sourcecode link points to http://sourceforge.net/projects/portabl ... 0Portable/). But, obviously, I know this forum is not the right place to discuss anything in order to discredit PortableApps.com.

Heh, nice catch. But since JTH has left this thread, I guess he'll never know about it.

[rikylov]

Heh, nice catch. But since JTH has left this thread, I guess he'll never know about it.

don't worry Hydaral, I'm pretty sure he is still reading this thread!

BTW, although this topic became a bit OT, it looks like as a bigh push on both sides (wPP and PA) to improve their projects.
Greetings you all