Then the disposition of LEGAL-96 is moot and there is no need to pay further attention to it as far as documents from ODFAuthors go.
- Dennis -----Original Message----- From: Rob Weir [mailto:robw...@apache.org] Sent: Friday, December 02, 2011 09:39 To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org Subject: Re: [odfauthors-discuss] Chapter 1 of the Base Guide ready for publication On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 12:31 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton <dennis.hamil...@acm.org> wrote: > [ODFAuthors subscriber hat on] > > My understanding of the current state of LEGAL-96, > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-96> is that a concrete case is > required. I don't see one here unless the Apache OpenOffice project > proposes to change the terms of use for the Wiki to say that all new > contributions must be under category-A licenses. > Actually, so there is no uncertainty, that is exactly my proposal, that all new contributions to the wiki are under Apache 2.0 license. However, no objections to linking to non-ALv2 content hosted on other websites -Rob [ ... ]
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
