On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 10:37 PM, Rob Weir <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Jul 12, 2011, at 4:41 PM, Simon Phipps <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 7:00 PM, Rob Weir <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> Another option that comes to mind: > >> > >> 3) Have OOo extensions hosted by a 3rd party website and we link to > >> that site. It is done that way essentially now with OSL. But I think > >> we'll want to be more explicit about such links to 3rd party sites > >> going forward, stating that this is not Apache code, etc. > >> > >> Also, if most of the extensions are applicable to LibreOffice and > >> other derived products, as well as OpenOffice, then this might be an > >> opportunity for collaboration with The Document Foundation on a common > >> extension repository. > >> > > > > As it happens I'd already started exploring this one with the Document > > Foundation Steering Committee, and Jomar Silva raised it on the > TDF-Discuss > > list. TDF are just about to launch a full version of their extensions & > > templates system and they would be perfectly happy for AOOo to redirect > the > > URL that OpenOffice.org is using to access the repository so that it uses > > the system TDF are hosting for LibreOffice. > > Is the intent to host all of the extensions currently at the OOo site? > Or a subset? Or a different set? > They host only extensions that have open source licenses, so the ones at the OOo site that have proprietary licenses are not hosted. S.
