On Jul 12, 2011, at 4:41 PM, Simon Phipps <si...@webmink.com> wrote: > On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 7:00 PM, Rob Weir <apa...@robweir.com> 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 are also happy for this arrangement to continue for as long as it makes > sense, and have no problem with a shared repository indefinitely. Like > Apache, they are only willing to host open source packages, so if anyone > wanted a system that also hosted closed packages it would need to be created > as a downstream of TDF's system > I'm happy to act as a liaison on this if necessary, as I suspect is Jomar. > > S.
