Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-incubator-ooo-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-ooo-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 6A94078CF for ; Sat, 10 Sep 2011 16:50:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 96137 invoked by uid 500); 10 Sep 2011 16:50:21 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-ooo-dev-archive@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 96088 invoked by uid 500); 10 Sep 2011 16:50:20 -0000 Mailing-List: contact ooo-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 96080 invoked by uid 99); 10 Sep 2011 16:50:20 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sat, 10 Sep 2011 16:50:20 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of dave2wave@comcast.net designates 76.96.30.56 as permitted sender) Received: from [76.96.30.56] (HELO qmta06.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net) (76.96.30.56) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sat, 10 Sep 2011 16:50:12 +0000 Received: from omta16.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net ([76.96.30.72]) by qmta06.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net with comcast id X4oL1h0041ZMdJ4A64pktr; Sat, 10 Sep 2011 16:49:44 +0000 Received: from [192.168.1.9] ([67.180.51.144]) by omta16.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net with comcast id X4pV1h00B36gVt78c4pVeZ; Sat, 10 Sep 2011 16:49:29 +0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084) Subject: Re: Concerns about all PDL website material From: Dave Fisher In-Reply-To: Date: Sat, 10 Sep 2011 09:49:49 -0700 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <1979C0EC-8F52-4930-9362-E1AC2A3CBE53@comcast.net> References: <80EF3511-7E3A-4DE5-AC5F-5A5017ABCD16@comcast.net>

<01c001cc6db3$6eb12b20$4c138160$@acm.org> <4BC150CB-3C72-41CF-869C-9191FFF69997@comcast.net> To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084) X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org On Sep 10, 2011, at 9:05 AM, Kay Schenk wrote: > On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 4:57 PM, Dave Fisher = wrote: >=20 >> Hi Dennis, >>=20 >> I am under impression that the license for everything on OOo is PDL, = yet >> almost nothing fulfills the terms. >>=20 >> Copyrights are with the Initial Writer. If I can find an Initial = Writer I >> will mark it - pretty much only in tags although that is whose = OOo >> back in 2000/2002 created or changed the page or some lists in some = places. >>=20 >> As far as copyright where there is no identified Initial Writer = should we: >>=20 >> (1) Have no copyright. >> (2) Put the ASF copyright in place. >> (3) Put an Oracle copyright on it. >> (4) Put an OpenOffice.org copyright on it. >>=20 >> We can't do (3) we're not Oracle. We should stop doing (2). >>=20 >> Unless there is an argument in one direction or another I'll do (1) = by Lazy >> Consensus. >>=20 >> I recommend that as we replace pages with AOOo policies that we = create >> mdtext replacements as fresh files. >>=20 >> On Sep 7, 2011, at 4:11 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote: >>=20 >>> Dave, >>>=20 >>> 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. >>>=20 >>> 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. >>>=20 >>> 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? >>=20 >> That is my concern. Kay will need to assure that we know which wiki = pages >> came in as "PDL" as I think they'll need to stay that way. >>=20 >=20 > uh...well I am not sure AT ALL how to determine this esp the pages = that are > not English. Oh joy -- I'm not a good legal eagle. :( I think we will need to count on NL teams to do IP clearance in their = own language and either update, delete or move to the wiki. At least the = DE site is behind in several areas - especially licensing. >=20 > Somehow I have a feeling that when OpenOffice.org spec'd the PDL, = we/they > were just trying to use something convenient that was available in the > public domain. I now believe that most of the site is licensed via OCA and/or Terms of = Use. We'll need to point to sign contributors and mention a some parts = are copyright .... Oracle and a long list of people. We can then get = legal-discuss@a.o to review. >=20 > Anyway, I'll take a look at the NL sites in the next day or so and see = what > I can determine. Sure, I think that we should proceed with converting everything we can = from the OOo website to our incubator site. Whatever you move to the = wiki can be removed or left as a simple stump that might be able to = provide some way to preserve links into the project. I'll adjust the wrapping so that we aren't asserting a wrong copyright = and provide a better license link. This will take more work with the = Apache CMS. When the time comes to standup an Apache hosted openoffice.org we show = what we have, and keep on changing and updating. To me the only prerequisites to Apache hosting are: (1) align OOo site policies with the AOOo project - clearance from the = podling PPMC and Mentors. (2) have appropriate license and copyright notices. - clearance from the = apache legal. (3) have appropriate branding. - clearance from trademarks. What do you think? Regards, Dave >=20 >=20 >>=20 >>>=20 >>> 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 = . >> 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. >>=20 >> That's not the concern, the concern is if StarOffice, Sun, and/or = Oracle >> lost the paperwork. I suppose should we be presented with a copy of = the PDL >> from an Initial Writer then we fix the issue. >>=20 >> Regards, >> Dave >>=20 >>>=20 >>> - Dennis >>>=20 >>> RELAXED RETAIN, SUPPLEMENT, AND REPLACE SCENARIO >>>=20 >>> 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. >>>=20 >>> 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. >>>=20 >>>=20 >>> - Dennis >>>=20 >>> -----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 >>>=20 >>>=20 >>> On Sep 7, 2011, at 2:16 PM, Rob Weir wrote: >>>=20 >>>> On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 4:44 PM, Dave Fisher >> 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. >>>>>=20 >>>>> Please look at http://www.openoffice.org/licenses/PDL.html >>>>>=20 >>>>> (Whether the PDL is category A for Apache is a follow up, but = there is >> no point without resolving the following.) >>>>>=20 >>>>> Specifically look at: >>>>>=20 >>>>>> 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. >>>>>>=20 >>>>>=20 >>>>> and >>>>>=20 >>>>>> 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. >>>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>> 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. >>>=20 >>> 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? >>>=20 >>> Regards, >>> Dave >>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>>> 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. >>>>>=20 >>>>> Can anyone provide help here? Do most pages have an "INitial = Writer" >> and "Contributor" of Oracle Corporation? >>>>>=20 >>>>> Would we need to see if the archives from prior to the kenai = migration >> have enough history to determine "Initial Writers" and = "Contributors"? >>>>>=20 >>>>> Where are these appendices? >>>>>=20 >>>>> I don't see any point in working on the OOo website or transfers = to >> MWiki or CWiki without clarification. >>>>>=20 >>>>> Regards, >>>>> Dave >>>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >=20 >=20 > --=20 > = --------------------------------------------------------------------------= ------------- > MzK >=20 > "There's something about the sound of a train > that's very romantic and nostalgic and hopeful." > -- Paul Simon