incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jean Hollis Weber <>
Subject Re: Refactoring the brand: Apache ooo + (was branding)
Date Tue, 02 Aug 2011 02:38:07 GMT
On Mon, 2011-08-01 at 21:24 -0400, Rob Weir wrote: 
> I'd look at it like this:  The documentation that is needed for our
> users to be successful with our product, from end users, to admins, to
> application developers, that documentation is product documentation.
> If having it deleted or defaced, without us noticing it, would cause
> our users some harm, then it is product documentation.  If the right
> to copy, modify and redistribute the documentation is essentially to
> successful creating and hosting a new port or translation, or even a
> commercial derivative or an open source fork, of the project, then it
> is product documentation.

Leaving aside for the moment all the other user-doc type items on the
wiki, and looking specifically at the existing current set of user
guides (which are in ODT/PDF format, but made available for download
from the existing OOo wiki), I'm unclear how they will fit into this.
They are not currently under the Apache license, and we would never be
able to track down all the contributors to get them to agree to the
license and/or sign the iCLA. So are we talking only about future
updates to these docs? And if so, do you mean that every future
contributor to these guides during their production must sign the iCLA?
Or just that only someone with suitable access rights (committer?) can
put them on the wiki (in ODT/PDF format)? Or something else?


View raw message