incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Dennis E. Hamilton" <dennis.hamil...@acm.org>
Subject RE: Concerns about all PDL website material
Date Wed, 07 Sep 2011 23:11:09 GMT
Dave,

It would seem that these (few, I believe we're told) can be handled the same as unclear provenance
anywhere in the code base and its dependencies.  

The ideal time to clean these up would be when the site is under the OpenOffice.org domain
name but actually hosted on Apache infrastructure.  That gives complete ability to make all
of the adjustments that are needed, including the numerous minor ones to connect to the Bugzilla,
etc.

I'm not clear how migration of the wiki is impacted, unless you mean the proposed movement
of material now on static web pages into the wiki?

Exactly where are you finding these PDL license notices?  The first one I found was on the
"Open Office.org 3 Installation Guide", a PDF (or ODT) reachable from <http://download.openoffice.org/common/instructions.html>.
 If we *don't touch it* can't it be retained until a permissively-licenses alternative is
needed?  I don't see a reason to be concerned that the authors/contributors did not properly
execute the instructions of the license they have offered.

 - Dennis

RELAXED RETAIN, SUPPLEMENT, AND REPLACE SCENARIO

If the notices are always in standalone documents such as the Installation Guide, I don't
see any problem making them available the same way they are now.  They should simply be left
intact.  They can be replaced by non-derivative replacements later, when there are Apache
OOo releases that require different information.  I don't see why we have to hurry.  Instructions
for existing releases remain valuable to keep around.  I suggest preserving them right where
they are, where people expect to find them.  

When there are releases from Apache OOo, supplementary documents could be offered.  That would
be another way to provide specific information applicable to later releases.  I see considerable
time before these PDL-licensed documents need to be supplanted. They might be retained for
a very long time. 


 - Dennis 

-----Original Message-----
From: Dave Fisher [mailto:dave2wave@comcast.net] 
Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 14:33
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: Concerns about all PDL website material


On Sep 7, 2011, at 2:16 PM, Rob Weir wrote:

> On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 4:44 PM, Dave Fisher <dave2wave@comcast.net> wrote:
>> I am stuck on a licensing issue with the OpenOffice.org website and I begin to doubt
if can do much with it other than rehost and correct obvious changes in policy.
>> 
>> Please look at http://www.openoffice.org/licenses/PDL.html
>> 
>> (Whether the PDL is category A for Apache is a follow up, but there is no point without
resolving the following.)
>> 
>> Specifically look at:
>> 
>>> Required Notices.
>>> You must duplicate the notice in the Appendix in each file of the Documentation.
If it is not possible to put such notice in a particular Documentation file due to its structure,
then You must include such notice in a location (such as a relevant directory) where a reader
would be likely to look for such a notice, for example, via a hyperlink in each file of the
Documentation that takes the reader to a page that describes the origin and ownership of the
Documentation. If You created one or more Modification(s) You may add your name as a Contributor
to the notice described in the Appendix.
>>> You must also duplicate this License in any Documentation file (or with a hyperlink
in each file of the Documentation) where You describe recipients' rights or ownership rights.
>>> 
>> 
>> and
>> 
>>> Appendix
>>> Public Documentation License Notice
>>> The contents of this Documentation are subject to the Public Documentation License
Version 1.0 (the "License"); you may only use this Documentation if you comply with the terms
of this License. A copy of the License is available at __________________[Insert hyperlink].
>>> The Original Documentation is _________________. The Initial Writer of the Original
Documentation is ___________ Copyright (C)_________[Insert year(s)]. All Rights Reserved.
(Initial Writer contact(s):________________[Insert hyperlink/alias]).
>>> Contributor(s): ______________________________________.
>>> Portions created by ______ are Copyright (C)_________[Insert year(s)]. All Rights
Reserved. (Contributor contact(s):________________[Insert hyperlink/alias]).
>>> NOTE: The text of this Appendix may differ slightly from the text of the notices
in the files of the Original Documentation. You should use the text of this Appendixrather
than the text found in the Original Documentation for Your Modifications.
>> 
> 
> Does it ever actually require that someone fill in the blanks in the
> Appendix?  I see that it requires one to duplicate the notice in the
> appendix.  And it permits (but does not require) initial writers and
> contributors to add their names to the Appendix.

If no one seems to ever provide this information then what can we assume? If there is no Initial
Writer then who holds the copyright? Where's the paperwork? Where does that leave us? Square
one on the website and anything derived from PDL?

Regards,
Dave

> 
>> I can find no answer to the question about who are the initial writers and further
contributors are for all most all web pages. There are some that have meta tags, but that
is not following the terms.
>> 
>> Can anyone provide help here? Do most pages have an "INitial Writer" and "Contributor"
of Oracle Corporation?
>> 
>> Would we need to see if the archives from prior to the kenai migration have enough
history to determine "Initial Writers" and "Contributors"?
>> 
>> Where are these appendices?
>> 
>> I don't see any point in working on the OOo website or transfers to MWiki or CWiki
without clarification.
>> 
>> Regards,
>> Dave


Mime
View raw message