There is a nice example of cooperation on l10n, where the project lead of libreOffice uses the list to have a volunteer translate non-AOO files to greek (at least they do not carry the AOO license header).
At least to avoid misunderstandings, I think Rob´s thought are highly required so everybody knows what the "game rules" are. Jan. Ps. I am NOT judging right or wrong, simply stating it would be nice if the files could be AOO as well. On 15 November 2012 22:19, Andrea Pescetti <[email protected]> wrote: > Rob Weir wrote: > >> The problem: Many (most?) open source contributors are not opposed to >> AOO or LO. They are just interested in helping out. If they produce >> a patch, or documentation, fix a bug or add a translation, they want >> to maximize the public good that comes from that work. >> > > You are writing this from the point of view of an individual contributor, > but, as Day 3 of the ApacheCon http://s.apache.org/** > openoffice-aceu2012-day-3 > <http://s.apache.org/openoffice-aceu2012-day-3>showed, a huge opportunity is > sponsored development. In that case, > contributions are often more significant and the sponsor gets to choose the > contractual details. Whatever policy (or set of instructions) we establish, > we must make sure this case is included too. > > > A contributor merely needs to state that they are making their patch >> available to AOO under ALv2. There are various ways to record this >> fact publicly. One is to make the statement in the source system (git >> or BZ). But that is extra work. Another way might be submit an iCLA >> to Apache. Another way might be to publicly record an intention on >> our dev@ list >> > > An ICLA is likely the safest way for large contributions. But this merely > shifts the problem to defining the meaning of "large"... > > Regards, > Andrea. >
