Res wrote: > On Tue, April 10, 2007 12:41 pm, Matthew Miller wrote: >> On Tue, Apr 10, 2007 at 12:18:30PM +1000, Res wrote: >>>> That's not "stripped", that's "can't legally include". >>> BS, if the code producers have a complete package and fedora decide >>> they >>> dont want to or cant for their own internal policy reasons include a >>> part >>> of it, thats STRIPPED, it is STRIPPED code that IS in the >>> correct/real/publicly available TRUE source and binaries released by the >>> code producers. >> Again, nothing is stripped gratuitously. If it's not free software, it >> can't >> be included. >> > > but it is stripped, as it is not the same code as released by OOo Fine, use "stripped", use "removed", use "altered". It makes no difference other than what the writer intends (or unintentionally) to imply. Yes, portions of the original OpenOffice are (insert choice word here) due to licensing and or other restrictions either expressly noted by OpenOffice and/or its contributors or decided by the Fedora packagers to avoid potential litigation. Should you not like it, you are free to download the original rpm's from OpenOffice.org. FWIW, I can't find it...and nobody has pointed to the original srpm from OpenOffice.org. So, what is the BFD?
