Hi Pedro,
On Wed, 2012-01-04 at 06:38 -0800, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
> What will happen is that the code will keep the MPL/LGPL3
> restrictions in addition to the AL2.
That would be the plan; though our code will -emphatically- not be
available under the AL2; only an MPL/LGPLv3+ [as well as any lingering
terms from the AL2].
> - They will have to carry the AL2 license among their code
> and headers, and the clause 5 is particularly nice to have.
Clause five of the AL2 is:
"5. Submission of Contributions. Unless You explicitly state
otherwise, any Contribution intentionally submitted for
inclusion in the Work by You to the Licensor shall be under the
terms and conditions of this License, without any additional
terms or conditions. Notwithstanding the above, nothing herein
shall supersede or modify the terms of any separate license
agreement you may have executed with Licensor regarding such
Contributions."
IANAL, but to create a superabundance of clarity - no contribution
submitted to LibreOffice is a 'Contribution'. It is not submitted to
'Licensor' which is ASF (cf. definition of Contribution). The TDF
infrastructure is not /managed by, or on behalf of, the ASF/.
If it would help to clarify this, we can add a "Not a contribution"
line or similar language to our new (MPL/LGPL)onAL2 header as/when we've
got that worked through.
Of course, individuals are quite at liberty to choose to license their
contributions to the ASF if they so choose, and to include -their- code
into either project; though that is something I'd personally
discourage :-)
So - any expansion on "is particularly nice to have" would be helpful
Pedro - why do you think this is particularly nice ? :-)
All the best,
Michael.
--
[email protected] <><, Pseudo Engineer, itinerant idiot
