On 20 October 2013 20:59, Rob Weir <robw...@apache.org> wrote: > On Sun, Oct 20, 2013 at 1:03 PM, janI <j...@apache.org> wrote: > > Hi > > > > due to a question I got, I read these 2 pages: > > > > http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/AOOW:Copyrights > > > > http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Authors_licensing_declaration > > > > First page refers to oracle, and second page does not even mention the > > apache license. > > > > Is that really how we want it ? > > > > If you search the list archives for terms like "wiki" and "license" > you will find lengthy discussions of this topic. The net of it is: > we don't include the wiki in our releases. We don't package up or > redistribute the wiki. The legacy OpenOffice.org project did not > these things either. It was not covered by their CLA and it was not > included in Oracle's grant to Apache. Apparently the rights were > never centralized. > > So the first statement is accurate: content is copyright by Oracle or > the original authors. However, it makes sense to include, and even > encourage the Apache License 2.0 on that 2nd page. >
thx for the answer, just one question, I thought we linked from AOO executable among others readme and license in wiki (cwiki or mwiki), if so at least these pages should not be Oracle :-) rgds jan I. > > -Rob > > > I am not a legal adviser, but it seems wrong to me. > > > > rgds > > jan I. > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org > >
