Re: [Discuss][Wiki]Synchronizing (or not) localized wiki sites [was: Fwd: [UserGuide]My roadmap]

2013-06-09 Thread Andrea Pescetti

On 08/06/2013 RGB ES wrote:

At this point, I think we all agree that we have a bit of a license mess
that needs to be fixed in order to clarify the documentation project. So
here is one possible idea:

1- Move the current /Documentation page to /Documentation-OLD or
/Documentation-LEGACY(1), indicating at the begining that the content is
outdated
2- Create a new portal page on the old url with the characteristic
described bellow


This could work. But I'm tired of seeing Legacy notices everywhere. 
I'd prefer to call the legacy stuff Documentation-3 or something 
related to version 3. And new stuff should not be Documentation-AOO 
but simply Documentation. Apache OpenOffice is not a guest on the 
wiki, it is the main subject of the wiki, so it is redundant to say in 
the title that wiki pages discuss Apache OpenOffice.


Regards,
  Andrea.

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org



Re: [Discuss][Wiki]Synchronizing (or not) localized wiki sites [was: Fwd: [UserGuide]My roadmap]

2013-06-09 Thread RGB ES
2013/6/9 Andrea Pescetti pesce...@apache.org

 On 08/06/2013 RGB ES wrote:

 At this point, I think we all agree that we have a bit of a license mess
 that needs to be fixed in order to clarify the documentation project. So
 here is one possible idea:

 1- Move the current /Documentation page to /Documentation-OLD or
 /Documentation-LEGACY(1), indicating at the begining that the content is
 outdated
 2- Create a new portal page on the old url with the characteristic
 described bellow


 This could work. But I'm tired of seeing Legacy notices everywhere. I'd
 prefer to call the legacy stuff Documentation-3 or something related to
 version 3.


Agree. Calling it Documentation-3 is perfect.



 And new stuff should not be Documentation-AOO but simply
 Documentation.


Sure, that was the original idea. I just mentioned Documentation-AOO as a
transitional page where we can work without hurry, and then move the pages
to their right positions.

From Tuesday I'll start to work on the Draw guide, someone that can help me
with the portal page? I can do it myself, of course, but only on a couple
of weeks.

Regards
Ricardo



 Apache OpenOffice is not a guest on the wiki, it is the main subject of
 the wiki, so it is redundant to say in the title that wiki pages discuss
 Apache OpenOffice.

 Regards,
   Andrea.


 --**--**-
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: 
 dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.**apache.orgdev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
 For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org




Re: [Discuss][Wiki]Synchronizing (or not) localized wiki sites [was: Fwd: [UserGuide]My roadmap]

2013-06-08 Thread RGB ES
(top posting, because I'm not answering any particular post)

At this point, I think we all agree that we have a bit of a license mess
that needs to be fixed in order to clarify the documentation project. So
here is one possible idea:

1- Move the current /Documentation page to /Documentation-OLD or
/Documentation-LEGACY(1), indicating at the begining that the content is
outdated
2- Create a new portal page on the old url with the characteristic
described bellow

Characteristics for the new portal

* Introduction to the project, how to contact the group and participate,
pending tasks lists, etc.
* Links to the new, Apache licensed documentation (user guide, building
guide, etcetera) indicating that it's a work in progress and that new
contributors are welcomed.
* Add a section that points to the legacy page. Something like Apache
OpenOffice inherited not only the code from former OpenOffice.org project,
but also a huge amount of documentation. Some of those documents are still
valid, some don't, but you can find all of them here.

Once this new structure is in place for the main EN site, propagate it to
other languages will be easier than fixing current PDL licensed pages.

What do you think?

(1) Maybe it's better to first create the new portal on /Documentation-AOO,
when that new page is ready move /Documentation to /Documentation-Legacy,
then move /Documentation-AOO to /Documentation

Regards
Ricardo



2013/6/5 Dennis E. Hamilton dennis.hamil...@acm.org

 I don't believe the ASF iCLA I filed stipulates anything about ALv2,
 although it certainly stipulates what my contributions grant to the ASF and
 to anyone who receives my contribution via the ASF.  (Note that the grant
 to recipients is directly from me, via the iCLA, no matter what the ALv2
 says.)

 My comment is mainly with respect to pages on the wiki that are covered by
 licenses other than the ALv2 and what contributing any modifications to
 them entails, no matter what the ASF gets from me under the terms of my
 iCLA.

 Of course, a click-through registration that asserts ALv2 for
 contributions is fine, although the ASF and recipients still have more
 rights than that for any contribution I make.  The current statement about
 treating materials not under the default license still applies and I
 suspect a form of that has to remain in any click-through on registration.
  The iCLA doesn't (and can't) alter that situation.

  - Dennis

 -Original Message-
 From: Rob Weir [mailto:robw...@apache.org]
 Sent: Wednesday, June 5, 2013 01:24 PM
 To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
 Cc: l...@openoffice.apache.org; d...@openoffice.apache.org
 Subject: Re: [Discuss][Wiki]Synchronizing (or not) localized wiki sites
 [was: Fwd: [UserGuide]My roadmap]

 On Wed, Jun 5, 2013 at 4:12 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton orc...@apache.org
 wrote:
  +1
 
  I prepared my response before I saw this one.
 
  There is still need to be careful around this:
 
   However, when we create new material, including enhancements
   Of existing material, then we need to respect the ICLA which
   says our contributions are made under ALv2.  This might mean
   that going forward that modified content is covered by multiple
   licenses.
 
   1. When enhancing existing materials, the existing license must be
  honored.  How additional licensing works depends on the specific
  Conditions.  It should not be automatically assumed possible.
 
   2. Since our having accounts on the wiki are subject to the rules for
  The wiki, I'm not sure the ICLA governs (1).  As committers, we
  certainly shouldn't be asserting any other license, but the current
  license on the work is going to determine whether and how the ALv2
  can be introduced.
 

 The ICLA says:

  Contribution shall mean any original work of authorship,
including any modifications or additions to an existing work, that
is intentionally submitted by You to the Foundation for inclusion
in, or documentation of, any of the products owned or managed by
the Foundation (the Work). For the purposes of this definition,
submitted means any form of electronic, verbal, or written
communication sent to the Foundation or its representatives,
including but not limited to communication on electronic mailing
lists, source code control systems, and issue tracking systems that
are managed by, or on behalf of, the Foundation for the purpose of
discussing and improving the Work, but excluding communication that
is conspicuously marked or otherwise designated in writing by You
as Not a Contribution.

 So I think that covers wiki contributions as well since that is
 documentation of, yes?

 -Rob


  -Original Message-
  From: Rob Weir [mailto:robw...@apache.org]
  Sent: Wednesday, June 5, 2013 10:28 AM
  To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
  Cc: l...@openoffice.apache.org; d...@openoffice.apache.org
  Subject: Re: [Discuss][Wiki]Synchronizing (or not) localized

Re: [Discuss][Wiki]Synchronizing (or not) localized wiki sites [was: Fwd: [UserGuide]My roadmap]

2013-06-05 Thread Claudio Filho
Hi

2013/6/3 RGB ES rgb.m...@gmail.com:
 2013/6/3 Andrea Pescetti pesce...@apache.org

 On 02/06/2013 RGB ES wrote:

 Do we want to clone, for example, the documentation section on all the
 localized sites, just translating it? On Sun times that was the idea, with
 sub sites (portals) like
 http://wiki.services.**openoffice.org/wiki/**Documentationhttp://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation
 http://wiki.services.**openoffice.org/wiki/DE/**Documentationhttp://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/DE/Documentation
 http://wiki.services.**openoffice.org/wiki/FR/**Documentationhttp://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/FR/Documentation
 etc looking almost the same on all languages.

Ricardo, we can go by two ways, based in commom practice for mediawiki:
http://wiki.../Documentation and http://wiki.../Documentation/lang -
for localized pages from the core
http://wiki.../LANG/anything - for local/native texts.

 This can work. We also have this other infrastructure in place
 http://wiki.openoffice.org/**wiki/Main_Testhttp://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Main_Test
 added by Claudio a few months ago. See
 http://wiki.openoffice.org/**wiki/Template:Langhttp://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Template:Lang
 to see how it works. I don't know which approach is best for our case.

The *Template:* technology is for many other things, like menus,
sorts, and others. I think that we can use this first step based in
review the core and a way to translate it for other languages.

How our system is a mediawiki, i did a research about localization in
this software with the last methods, where i found some interesting
contents. I believe that with translate extension for mediawiki we
have the tool for this goal.

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Making_Multilingual_Wikis_a_Reality_-_Niklas_Laxstr%C3%B6m_and_Claus_Christensen.ogv
http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Help:Extension:Translate
http://translatewiki.net/wiki/Translating:MediaWiki

 As for keeping subsites synchronized, in theory this allows to have a
 Master copy in English and then translate it in the various languages as
 volunteers become available. In practice, we can't stop someone from
 editing or creating a translated page to add new content in a language
 only, but ideally this would imply that the English version is updated to
 reflect the changes too.

If i understood right, the translate extension will help us in this task.

 All those portal pages are under PDL license (look at the categories at
 the bottom of those pages). If we want to promote new wiki content under
 Apache license, this means a problem. If I read this page right

 http://www.openoffice.org/licenses/PDL.html

 PDL is a sort of copyleft license.

This is a excelent question. I ask to my self how the TDF did about
(more) this question. Can we do like them? Simply overwrite the
license and to continue the devel? (i remember when they copied all
sites/docs/contents, like api site, and changed the license)

 Re-license those pages is not possible without the explicit consent of the
 author, and those pages are so old that contact the authors is almost
 impossible. Suppose we update those pages to point to the new material. A
 potential contributor (or just a casual reader) will see the PDL notice on
 the portal page, and no notice on the new pages: from the user perspective,
 does this means that the new page is also under PDL? We know it isn't, but
 this could be a cause of confusion, IMO. So, which is the best way to work
 around this problem? Reimplement those pages, making a clear separation
 between new material (under Apache) and legacy content?

Maybe this is the unique way. By other hand, is a opportunity of
review all content in the wiki, reorder and clean it, and evolve based
in the correct license. In some cases, we can see the page history and
try to find the author. Some parts, i believe that is all from
Sun/Oracle copyright, so transfered to ASF.

My 2¢
Claudio

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org



Re: [Discuss][Wiki]Synchronizing (or not) localized wiki sites [was: Fwd: [UserGuide]My roadmap]

2013-06-05 Thread Rob Weir
On Wed, Jun 5, 2013 at 12:02 PM, janI j...@apache.org wrote:
 On 5 June 2013 16:36, Claudio Filho filh...@gmail.com wrote:

 Hi

 2013/6/3 RGB ES rgb.m...@gmail.com:
  2013/6/3 Andrea Pescetti pesce...@apache.org
 
  On 02/06/2013 RGB ES wrote:
 
  Do we want to clone, for example, the documentation section on all
 the
  localized sites, just translating it? On Sun times that was the idea,
 with
  sub sites (portals) like
  http://wiki.services.**openoffice.org/wiki/**Documentation
 http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation
  http://wiki.services.**openoffice.org/wiki/DE/**Documentation
 http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/DE/Documentation
  http://wiki.services.**openoffice.org/wiki/FR/**Documentation
 http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/FR/Documentation
  etc looking almost the same on all languages.

 Ricardo, we can go by two ways, based in commom practice for mediawiki:
 http://wiki.../Documentation and http://wiki.../Documentation/lang -
 for localized pages from the core
 http://wiki.../LANG/anything - for local/native texts.

  This can work. We also have this other infrastructure in place
  http://wiki.openoffice.org/**wiki/Main_Test
 http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Main_Test
  added by Claudio a few months ago. See
  http://wiki.openoffice.org/**wiki/Template:Lang
 http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Template:Lang
  to see how it works. I don't know which approach is best for our case.

 The *Template:* technology is for many other things, like menus,
 sorts, and others. I think that we can use this first step based in
 review the core and a way to translate it for other languages.

 How our system is a mediawiki, i did a research about localization in
 this software with the last methods, where i found some interesting
 contents. I believe that with translate extension for mediawiki we
 have the tool for this goal.


 http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Making_Multilingual_Wikis_a_Reality_-_Niklas_Laxstr%C3%B6m_and_Claus_Christensen.ogv
 http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Help:Extension:Translate
 http://translatewiki.net/wiki/Translating:MediaWikie


 I checked the extension, it is possible to install it on our mwiki.


  As for keeping subsites synchronized, in theory this allows to have a
  Master copy in English and then translate it in the various languages
 as
  volunteers become available. In practice, we can't stop someone from
  editing or creating a translated page to add new content in a language
  only, but ideally this would imply that the English version is updated
 to
  reflect the changes too.

 If i understood right, the translate extension will help us in this task.

  All those portal pages are under PDL license (look at the categories at
  the bottom of those pages). If we want to promote new wiki content under
  Apache license, this means a problem. If I read this page right
 
  http://www.openoffice.org/licenses/PDL.html
 
  PDL is a sort of copyleft license.


We've tried to avoid this problem by starting new documentation in
ALv2, not using the prior materials.  And remember, if we want to
borrow material, we have access to the complete Symphony documentation
as well, which is included in the IBM SGA for Symphony.  So all of
that can be treated as ALv2.


 This is a excelent question. I ask to my self how the TDF did about
 (more) this question. Can we do like them? Simply overwrite the
 license and to continue the devel? (i remember when they copied all
 sites/docs/contents, like api site, and changed the license)


 I have seen similar things happen in other wikis. The way forward seems to
 be
 1) announce the intention of changing license.
 2) request contributors who do not agree, to remove their pages (we have
 mail adresses on the users)
 3) give contributors time to do it.
 4) change license.


This is overkill.  There is no need to remove PDL pages.  Maybe just
move them if they are inconvenient?  But if the content is relevant,
why remove?

The way forward is to respect the licenses as they are.  We have
greater latitude in what legacy licenses are used on the website than
we do in the AOO product itself.   We've had no problems at all
hosting Creative Content licensed documentation, PDL content, etc., on
the website, wiki, etc.  Nothing has changed in that regard.

However, when we create new material, including enhancements of
existing material, then we need to respect the ICLA which says our
contributions are made under ALv2.  This might mean that going forward
that modified content is covered by multiple licenses.  This should
not be a problem.

 We should put the license in as part of create user, as an do you
 accept, thereby we only have a  problem with existing users.


This would be nice.


  Re-license those pages is not possible without the explicit consent of
 the
  author, and those pages are so old that contact the authors is almost
  impossible. Suppose we update those pages to point to the new material. A
  potential contributor 

RE: [Discuss][Wiki]Synchronizing (or not) localized wiki sites [was: Fwd: [UserGuide]My roadmap]

2013-06-05 Thread Dennis E. Hamilton
@JanI,

Uh oh.

If you don't have explicit agreement from the contributor(s) to a page 
concerning it being offered under a different license, either leave the 
existing license or remove the content.  Those are the only legally-sanitary 
options for works still under copyright.

Declaring a work still in copyright to be orphaned does not give you permission 
to republish it with a different license.  Copyright doesn't work that way, not 
merely in the US.

Secondly, the web site and wiki content were not, as far as I know, included in 
the grant from Oracle. There has clearly been no objection, the domains were 
transferred to the ASF, but technically that does not in any way change the 
copyright status of any of the content.  (The source-code grant, by the way, 
did not transfer any copyright to the ASF.  It simply provided a license to the 
ASF that allowed the ASF to publish and make derivatives under its license.  
Copyright in the original content continues to abide with Oracle.)

While casual treatment of this sort of thing succeeds in some situations, here 
the interests and concerns of The Apache Software Foundation as a 
public-interest entity come into play.  It is expected that folks on Apache 
projects will play nice with the intellectual property of others.  

In particular,

   2) We are allowed to copy  the pages, with changes, and the new page can be
  under a new license

is not ever automatically true.  If there is already a license, the terms of 
that license will determine what is possible with a derivative work (with 
changes).  Even copying is an exclusive right of the copyright holder, so the 
license matters there too.  In the absence of a license, (2) is not permitted 
at all by anyone but the copyright holder or someone authorized by the 
copyright holder (i.e., being licensed to do so).

Finally, and most important, making changes does not give anyone different 
rights to the parts that survive from the original work.  (Fine points about 
license conditions apply here, but one should never assume that a legitimate 
licensing of a derivative work has any impact on the IP interests in the 
surviving content of the original work.)

 - Dennis

-Original Message-
From: janI [mailto:j...@apache.org] 
Sent: Wednesday, June 5, 2013 09:02 AM
To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
Cc: l...@openoffice.apache.org; d...@openoffice.apache.org
Subject: Re: [Discuss][Wiki]Synchronizing (or not) localized wiki sites [was: 
Fwd: [UserGuide]My roadmap]

[ ... ]
  PDL is a sort of copyleft license.

 This is a excelent question. I ask to my self how the TDF did about
 (more) this question. Can we do like them? Simply overwrite the
 license and to continue the devel? (i remember when they copied all
 sites/docs/contents, like api site, and changed the license)


I have seen similar things happen in other wikis. The way forward seems to
be
1) announce the intention of changing license.
2) request contributors who do not agree, to remove their pages (we have
mail adresses on the users)
3) give contributors time to do it.
4) change license.

We should put the license in as part of create user, as an do you
accept, thereby we only have a  problem with existing users.


  Re-license those pages is not possible without the explicit consent of
 the
  author, and those pages are so old that contact the authors is almost
  impossible. Suppose we update those pages to point to the new material. A
  potential contributor (or just a casual reader) will see the PDL notice
 on
  the portal page, and no notice on the new pages: from the user
 perspective,
  does this means that the new page is also under PDL? We know it isn't,
 but
  this could be a cause of confusion, IMO. So, which is the best way to
 work
  around this problem? Reimplement those pages, making a clear separation
  between new material (under Apache) and legacy content?

 Maybe this is the unique way. By other hand, is a opportunity of
 review all content in the wiki, reorder and clean it, and evolve based
 in the correct license. In some cases, we can see the page history and
 try to find the author. Some parts, i believe that is all from
 Sun/Oracle copyright, so transfered to ASF.


A cleanup would be nice independent of which way we go

The word re-licensing is not a show stopper.
1) We are not obligated to store those pages for ever, we can, with notice,
delete the pages
2) We are allowed to copy  the pages, with changes, and the new page can be
under a new license

rgds
jan I


 My 2¢
 Claudio

 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
 For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org




-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org



RE: [Discuss][Wiki]Synchronizing (or not) localized wiki sites [was: Fwd: [UserGuide]My roadmap]

2013-06-05 Thread Dennis E. Hamilton
+1 

I prepared my response before I saw this one.

There is still need to be careful around this:

 However, when we create new material, including enhancements 
 Of existing material, then we need to respect the ICLA which 
 says our contributions are made under ALv2.  This might mean 
 that going forward that modified content is covered by multiple 
 licenses.

 1. When enhancing existing materials, the existing license must be
honored.  How additional licensing works depends on the specific
Conditions.  It should not be automatically assumed possible.

 2. Since our having accounts on the wiki are subject to the rules for
The wiki, I'm not sure the ICLA governs (1).  As committers, we
certainly shouldn't be asserting any other license, but the current
license on the work is going to determine whether and how the ALv2 
can be introduced.

-Original Message-
From: Rob Weir [mailto:robw...@apache.org] 
Sent: Wednesday, June 5, 2013 10:28 AM
To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
Cc: l...@openoffice.apache.org; d...@openoffice.apache.org
Subject: Re: [Discuss][Wiki]Synchronizing (or not) localized wiki sites [was: 
Fwd: [UserGuide]My roadmap]

[ ... ]
  All those portal pages are under PDL license (look at the categories at
  the bottom of those pages). If we want to promote new wiki content under
  Apache license, this means a problem. If I read this page right
 
  http://www.openoffice.org/licenses/PDL.html
 
  PDL is a sort of copyleft license.


We've tried to avoid this problem by starting new documentation in
ALv2, not using the prior materials.  And remember, if we want to
borrow material, we have access to the complete Symphony documentation
as well, which is included in the IBM SGA for Symphony.  So all of
that can be treated as ALv2.


[ ... ]

This is overkill.  There is no need to remove PDL pages.  Maybe just
move them if they are inconvenient?  But if the content is relevant,
why remove?

The way forward is to respect the licenses as they are.  We have
greater latitude in what legacy licenses are used on the website than
we do in the AOO product itself.   We've had no problems at all
hosting Creative Content licensed documentation, PDL content, etc., on
the website, wiki, etc.  Nothing has changed in that regard.

However, when we create new material, including enhancements of
existing material, then we need to respect the ICLA which says our
contributions are made under ALv2.  This might mean that going forward
that modified content is covered by multiple licenses.  This should
not be a problem.

[ ... ]


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org



Re: [Discuss][Wiki]Synchronizing (or not) localized wiki sites [was: Fwd: [UserGuide]My roadmap]

2013-06-05 Thread Rob Weir
On Wed, Jun 5, 2013 at 4:12 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton orc...@apache.org wrote:
 +1

 I prepared my response before I saw this one.

 There is still need to be careful around this:

  However, when we create new material, including enhancements
  Of existing material, then we need to respect the ICLA which
  says our contributions are made under ALv2.  This might mean
  that going forward that modified content is covered by multiple
  licenses.

  1. When enhancing existing materials, the existing license must be
 honored.  How additional licensing works depends on the specific
 Conditions.  It should not be automatically assumed possible.

  2. Since our having accounts on the wiki are subject to the rules for
 The wiki, I'm not sure the ICLA governs (1).  As committers, we
 certainly shouldn't be asserting any other license, but the current
 license on the work is going to determine whether and how the ALv2
 can be introduced.


The ICLA says:

 Contribution shall mean any original work of authorship,
   including any modifications or additions to an existing work, that
   is intentionally submitted by You to the Foundation for inclusion
   in, or documentation of, any of the products owned or managed by
   the Foundation (the Work). For the purposes of this definition,
   submitted means any form of electronic, verbal, or written
   communication sent to the Foundation or its representatives,
   including but not limited to communication on electronic mailing
   lists, source code control systems, and issue tracking systems that
   are managed by, or on behalf of, the Foundation for the purpose of
   discussing and improving the Work, but excluding communication that
   is conspicuously marked or otherwise designated in writing by You
   as Not a Contribution.

So I think that covers wiki contributions as well since that is
documentation of, yes?

-Rob


 -Original Message-
 From: Rob Weir [mailto:robw...@apache.org]
 Sent: Wednesday, June 5, 2013 10:28 AM
 To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
 Cc: l...@openoffice.apache.org; d...@openoffice.apache.org
 Subject: Re: [Discuss][Wiki]Synchronizing (or not) localized wiki sites 
 [was: Fwd: [UserGuide]My roadmap]

 [ ... ]
  All those portal pages are under PDL license (look at the categories at
  the bottom of those pages). If we want to promote new wiki content under
  Apache license, this means a problem. If I read this page right
 
  http://www.openoffice.org/licenses/PDL.html
 
  PDL is a sort of copyleft license.


 We've tried to avoid this problem by starting new documentation in
 ALv2, not using the prior materials.  And remember, if we want to
 borrow material, we have access to the complete Symphony documentation
 as well, which is included in the IBM SGA for Symphony.  So all of
 that can be treated as ALv2.


 [ ... ]

 This is overkill.  There is no need to remove PDL pages.  Maybe just
 move them if they are inconvenient?  But if the content is relevant,
 why remove?

 The way forward is to respect the licenses as they are.  We have
 greater latitude in what legacy licenses are used on the website than
 we do in the AOO product itself.   We've had no problems at all
 hosting Creative Content licensed documentation, PDL content, etc., on
 the website, wiki, etc.  Nothing has changed in that regard.

 However, when we create new material, including enhancements of
 existing material, then we need to respect the ICLA which says our
 contributions are made under ALv2.  This might mean that going forward
 that modified content is covered by multiple licenses.  This should
 not be a problem.

 [ ... ]


 -
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
 For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org



RE: [Discuss][Wiki]Synchronizing (or not) localized wiki sites [was: Fwd: [UserGuide]My roadmap]

2013-06-05 Thread Dennis E. Hamilton
I don't believe the ASF iCLA I filed stipulates anything about ALv2, although 
it certainly stipulates what my contributions grant to the ASF and to anyone 
who receives my contribution via the ASF.  (Note that the grant to recipients 
is directly from me, via the iCLA, no matter what the ALv2 says.)

My comment is mainly with respect to pages on the wiki that are covered by 
licenses other than the ALv2 and what contributing any modifications to them 
entails, no matter what the ASF gets from me under the terms of my iCLA.  

Of course, a click-through registration that asserts ALv2 for contributions is 
fine, although the ASF and recipients still have more rights than that for any 
contribution I make.  The current statement about treating materials not under 
the default license still applies and I suspect a form of that has to remain in 
any click-through on registration.  The iCLA doesn't (and can't) alter that 
situation.
 
 - Dennis

-Original Message-
From: Rob Weir [mailto:robw...@apache.org] 
Sent: Wednesday, June 5, 2013 01:24 PM
To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
Cc: l...@openoffice.apache.org; d...@openoffice.apache.org
Subject: Re: [Discuss][Wiki]Synchronizing (or not) localized wiki sites [was: 
Fwd: [UserGuide]My roadmap]

On Wed, Jun 5, 2013 at 4:12 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton orc...@apache.org wrote:
 +1

 I prepared my response before I saw this one.

 There is still need to be careful around this:

  However, when we create new material, including enhancements
  Of existing material, then we need to respect the ICLA which
  says our contributions are made under ALv2.  This might mean
  that going forward that modified content is covered by multiple
  licenses.

  1. When enhancing existing materials, the existing license must be
 honored.  How additional licensing works depends on the specific
 Conditions.  It should not be automatically assumed possible.

  2. Since our having accounts on the wiki are subject to the rules for
 The wiki, I'm not sure the ICLA governs (1).  As committers, we
 certainly shouldn't be asserting any other license, but the current
 license on the work is going to determine whether and how the ALv2
 can be introduced.


The ICLA says:

 Contribution shall mean any original work of authorship,
   including any modifications or additions to an existing work, that
   is intentionally submitted by You to the Foundation for inclusion
   in, or documentation of, any of the products owned or managed by
   the Foundation (the Work). For the purposes of this definition,
   submitted means any form of electronic, verbal, or written
   communication sent to the Foundation or its representatives,
   including but not limited to communication on electronic mailing
   lists, source code control systems, and issue tracking systems that
   are managed by, or on behalf of, the Foundation for the purpose of
   discussing and improving the Work, but excluding communication that
   is conspicuously marked or otherwise designated in writing by You
   as Not a Contribution.

So I think that covers wiki contributions as well since that is
documentation of, yes?

-Rob


 -Original Message-
 From: Rob Weir [mailto:robw...@apache.org]
 Sent: Wednesday, June 5, 2013 10:28 AM
 To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
 Cc: l...@openoffice.apache.org; d...@openoffice.apache.org
 Subject: Re: [Discuss][Wiki]Synchronizing (or not) localized wiki sites 
 [was: Fwd: [UserGuide]My roadmap]

 [ ... ]
  All those portal pages are under PDL license (look at the categories at
  the bottom of those pages). If we want to promote new wiki content under
  Apache license, this means a problem. If I read this page right
 
  http://www.openoffice.org/licenses/PDL.html
 
  PDL is a sort of copyleft license.


 We've tried to avoid this problem by starting new documentation in
 ALv2, not using the prior materials.  And remember, if we want to
 borrow material, we have access to the complete Symphony documentation
 as well, which is included in the IBM SGA for Symphony.  So all of
 that can be treated as ALv2.


 [ ... ]

 This is overkill.  There is no need to remove PDL pages.  Maybe just
 move them if they are inconvenient?  But if the content is relevant,
 why remove?

 The way forward is to respect the licenses as they are.  We have
 greater latitude in what legacy licenses are used on the website than
 we do in the AOO product itself.   We've had no problems at all
 hosting Creative Content licensed documentation, PDL content, etc., on
 the website, wiki, etc.  Nothing has changed in that regard.

 However, when we create new material, including enhancements of
 existing material, then we need to respect the ICLA which says our
 contributions are made under ALv2.  This might mean that going forward
 that modified content is covered by multiple licenses.  This should
 not be a problem

Re: [Discuss][Wiki]Synchronizing (or not) localized wiki sites [was: Fwd: [UserGuide]My roadmap]

2013-06-03 Thread Andrea Pescetti

On 02/06/2013 RGB ES wrote:

(Top posting, CC to dev, doc and l10n, not sure on which one it is better
to continue the discussion)
Do we want to clone, for example, the documentation section on all the
localized sites, just translating it? On Sun times that was the idea, with
sub sites (portals) like
http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation
http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/DE/Documentation
http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/FR/Documentation
etc looking almost the same on all languages.


This can work. We also have this other infrastructure in place
http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Main_Test
added by Claudio a few months ago. See
http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Template:Lang
to see how it works. I don't know which approach is best for our case.

As for keeping subsites synchronized, in theory this allows to have a 
Master copy in English and then translate it in the various languages 
as volunteers become available. In practice, we can't stop someone from 
editing or creating a translated page to add new content in a language 
only, but ideally this would imply that the English version is updated 
to reflect the changes too.



AFAIK, right now the only of those sub sites updated recently is the French
one, though: several of those portals do not see activity since years.


Yes, but this does not mean that they are completely outdated: 
information in those pages is still current and relevant in most cases, 
and I think it makes sense to continue using it rather than starting 
clean there too (unless there are plans for a major rewrite).


Regards,
  Andrea.

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org



Fwd: [Discuss][Wiki]Synchronizing (or not) localized wiki sites [was: Fwd: [UserGuide]My roadmap]

2013-06-03 Thread RGB ES
Ops! I forgot to add dev and doc as CC...

-- Forwarded message --
From: RGB ES rgb.m...@gmail.com
Date: 2013/6/3
Subject: Re: [Discuss][Wiki]Synchronizing (or not) localized wiki sites
[was: Fwd: [UserGuide]My roadmap]
To: l...@openoffice.apache.org


2013/6/3 Andrea Pescetti pesce...@apache.org

 On 02/06/2013 RGB ES wrote:

 (Top posting, CC to dev, doc and l10n, not sure on which one it is better
 to continue the discussion)
 Do we want to clone, for example, the documentation section on all the
 localized sites, just translating it? On Sun times that was the idea, with
 sub sites (portals) like
 http://wiki.services.**openoffice.org/wiki/**Documentationhttp://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation
 http://wiki.services.**openoffice.org/wiki/DE/**Documentationhttp://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/DE/Documentation
 http://wiki.services.**openoffice.org/wiki/FR/**Documentationhttp://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/FR/Documentation
 etc looking almost the same on all languages.


 This can work. We also have this other infrastructure in place
 http://wiki.openoffice.org/**wiki/Main_Testhttp://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Main_Test
 added by Claudio a few months ago. See
 http://wiki.openoffice.org/**wiki/Template:Langhttp://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Template:Lang
 to see how it works. I don't know which approach is best for our case.

 As for keeping subsites synchronized, in theory this allows to have a
 Master copy in English and then translate it in the various languages as
 volunteers become available. In practice, we can't stop someone from
 editing or creating a translated page to add new content in a language
 only, but ideally this would imply that the English version is updated to
 reflect the changes too.


  AFAIK, right now the only of those sub sites updated recently is the
 French
 one, though: several of those portals do not see activity since years.


 Yes, but this does not mean that they are completely outdated: information
 in those pages is still current and relevant in most cases, and I think it
 makes sense to continue using it rather than starting clean there too
 (unless there are plans for a major rewrite).


All those portal pages are under PDL license (look at the categories at
the bottom of those pages). If we want to promote new wiki content under
Apache license, this means a problem. If I read this page right

http://www.openoffice.org/licenses/PDL.html

PDL is a sort of copyleft license.

Re-license those pages is not possible without the explicit consent of the
author, and those pages are so old that contact the authors is almost
impossible. Suppose we update those pages to point to the new material. A
potential contributor (or just a casual reader) will see the PDL notice on
the portal page, and no notice on the new pages: from the user perspective,
does this means that the new page is also under PDL? We know it isn't, but
this could be a cause of confusion, IMO. So, which is the best way to work
around this problem? Reimplement those pages, making a clear separation
between new material (under Apache) and legacy content?

Regards
Ricardo




 Regards,
   Andrea.

 --**--**-
 To unsubscribe, e-mail: 
 l10n-unsubscribe@openoffice.**apache.orgl10n-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
 For additional commands, e-mail: 
 l10n-help@openoffice.apache.**orgl10n-h...@openoffice.apache.org




[Discuss][Wiki]Synchronizing (or not) localized wiki sites [was: Fwd: [UserGuide]My roadmap]

2013-06-01 Thread RGB ES
(Top posting, CC to dev, doc and l10n, not sure on which one it is better
to continue the discussion)

Moving the discussion to its own thread, see below for a copy of the
previous messages or better here:

http://markmail.org/message/x6wntz5nwefj7ko3

(just skip the first message that had a completely different purpose...)

The original thread shows two problems. I'll not talk about the first one
here (to not communicate what someone is doing, at the risk of waste the
efforts of someone else that it's working on the same task). The second
problem, the one considered here, is about how do we want to organize the
wiki.

Do we want to clone, for example, the documentation section on all the
localized sites, just translating it? On Sun times that was the idea, with
sub sites (portals) like

http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation
http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/DE/Documentation
http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/FR/Documentation

etc looking almost the same on all languages.

AFAIK, right now the only of those sub sites updated recently is the French
one, though: several of those portals do not see activity since years.

I don't think that this cloning is possible or even desirable. Of course
an easy way to arrive to the same resources on the different languages *is*
desirable, and for this purpose a consolidated directory structure is
certainly useful, but if instead of /ES/Documentation we use /ES/Manuales I
cannot really see the problem.

Also, there is the problem that the content available on those old sites is
mainly outdated, build by a third party project and some(many)times with
the wrong license. Do we want to update that content or start almost from
scratch with the new user guide under Apache license, moving old content to
a legacy section?

Of course starting from scratch is more work, but updating documents with a
cocktail of licenses will be a problem too.

And note that starting from scratch does not mean trashing old content,
it's just saying this is the old content, maybe it's still useful, but we
are working on the new one here.

I think this was briefly discussed before on the dev list (with no clear
output), but I cannot find the original thread now.

Regards
Ricardo


-- Forwarded message --
From: Alexandro Colorado j...@oooes.org
Date: 2013/6/1
Subject: Re: [UserGuide]My roadmap
To: OpenOffice Documentation d...@openoffice.apache.org


On Sat, Jun 1, 2013 at 3:00 PM, RGB ES rgb.m...@gmail.com wrote:

 2013/6/1 Alexandro Colorado j...@oooes.org

  On Sat, Jun 1, 2013 at 2:23 PM, RGB ES rgb.m...@gmail.com wrote:
 
   2013/6/1 Alexandro Colorado j...@oooes.org
  
Is important to re-gain organization on the documentation project
   resources
like:
- ToDo List
- Wishlist
- Dashboard
- Help process
   
This resources althought outdated are pretty helpful for new and
experienced contributors to organize the work going on.
   
I generate a spanish version of the portal, but would need more than
  just
cloning old information .
   
http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/ES/Documentation
   
   
   
  
   Can you please use the ES mailing list to discuss whatever you want to
 do
   on the ES wiki FIRST of doing it? There is already a documentation
  section
   and a how to participate section here
  
   http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/ES/Manuales
   http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/ES/Participar
  
   If you look carefully you'll see other people beside me that started
to
   work on the site several month ago. As a matter of fact, the Spanish
 user
   guide is more advanced than the English one (just see the macro
  section)...
  
   Following discussions on the ES mailing list, the ES wiki was
 completely
   cleaned up and rebuilt almost from scratch last year.
  
  
  This is not a ES related matter, but a localization convention on
working
  and organizing languages on the Wiki. There is a PDL and Template for
  languages, in order to use the different localizations of the projects
 and
  the menu extensions labeled Other languages.
 
  Documentation or l10n lists is the only propper channels I can think on
  discussing this since is not only use by ES but the other languages.
 
  The content is also outdated on this project, not only on ES. The
 wishlist
  hasnt been updated since 2009 and there is already a *NeedsRework*
 category
  for the ToDo List.
 
 
 Only the French documentation page was updated recently, all the other
 localizations do not see work since several years so you are talking about
 a convention set on the old Sun times that nobody seems to follow now
and
 thus not necessarily valid today.

 If you want to discuss this or other conventions please start a new
 thread.

 But even if we accept a general convention (something that did not
happen
 yet) and even if we accept that this convention is not a matter for the ES
 list (!), to coordinate the work on the ES wiki IS something to discuss on