Let me state my assumptions, which might be incorrect, but I think it is worth being explicit, so my errors can be more easily corrected.
Apache projects make releases. These releases consist at least of tarballs containing source code. The contents of releases must be consist only of files under the Apache 2.0 license, or licenses which ASF has declared to be compatible with it. This includes not only source code files, but also any bundled documentation. To ensure that the releases remain compatible with Apache 2.0, the repositories that are used to feed into the releases are also controlled. So SVN can only be written by those who have signed the ICLA. A wiki used for bundled product documentation is restricted to committers as well. Presumably, to the extent we include translation files in our releases, these would need a similar level of attention, in terms of license and access control. Am I anywhere close in the above? If so, that leads me to two questions: 1) Are there any required license issues that we need to heed related to our website? Assume for sake of argument that we're talking about web site content that never becomes part of a release. So user guides, tutorials, as-is document templates that users could download, 3rd party plugins, additional 3rd party translation packs, user forums, etc. Is there any requirement that these all be harmonized on Apache 2.0 and compatible licenses? Or can we have a mix of licenses to that content, hosted by Apache in a sufficiently sand boxed environment? In other words, are the project's websites and all that we host at Apache required to be under an Apache-compatible license? Or can we have copyleft "extras" that we host, with caveats, but do not build ourselves or include in our releases? 2) If an existing independent group wishes to remain independent, and develop documentation or translations, or other similar modules, and then contribute it to the Apache OpenOffice project for inclusion in an official release, can this be done? Assume that the work is made available to us under a compatible license, so it is (in that sense) allowable in a release. Is there any mechanism for an Apache project to routinely accept and release such modules? Or would this require an SGA/Incubation proposal each time? Or is there any streamlined way of doing this? I'm not arguing that #1 or #2 is a good idea or not. But some conversations seem to be leading to these directions, so I think it is worth clarifying exactly what is allowed. Thanks! -Rob
