RE: Dual licensing of patches and code
It is not clear to me that the Apache OpenOffice statement answers the question as it was asked at [tdf-discuss]. I read Jim's question as being about multi-licensing (dual- or more). Not about a contributor making a contribution of their original work in two places and under different licenses in each place. That's very different. If the AOO page is considered an affirmative response to Jim's question, then so is Florian Effenberger's pointing to The Document Foundation license-policy page, <https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/License_Policy>. For me, multi-licensing would be a kind of one-stop contribution that allows the contribution to be used by those who obtain it in accordance with whichever of the multi-licensings they choose. Nothing is done to facilitate that by either project. Furthermore, all of the licenses that are considered have strings on how a contri- bution is accounted for in any combined/derivative work. By the way, there is no mention of the Apache License (any version) in the iCLA that is offered to the ASF and that all committers have on record. It strikes me that a contribution in accordance with the default case in section 5 of the ALv2 is similarly entirely about sections 2, 3 and related definitions. The sections about recipients is not something that governs the contributor's use of their own contribution (a good reason those are not in the iCLA, since an iCLA is entirely about contribution). Cf. <http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0>. The manner in which TDF collects license grants is rather different, with contributors specifying the licenses that their work can be released under (i.e., they are multi-licensing their contributions). >From all of this, you can surmise what I mean to accomplish by my blanket, public grants regarding my contributions to LibreOffice and Apache projects, so that anyone can make us of those contributions, no matter which project the contributed is made to, with the same permissiveness granted to the ASF in an Apache iCLA. And that can be done without my having to make direct contributions in more than one of those places. - Dennis PS: I am not cross-posting this response. I shall forward my part to [tdf-discuss] however. -Original Message- From: Andrea Pescetti [mailto:pesce...@apache.org] Sent: Saturday, March 09, 2013 02:40 To: dev@openoffice.apache.org Cc: Jim Jagielski; disc...@documentfoundation.org; i...@documentfoundation.org Subject: Re: Dual licensing of patches and code The conversation below happened in public, but not on the OpenOffice public lists. I believe it's good to record its outcome here on the OpenOffice dev list too. Summary: - Question from Jim Jagielski: "Is a contribution under ALv2 + MPL + LGPLv3+ acceptable to both OpenOffice and LibreOffice (and Apache Software Foundation and The Document Foundation)?" - Answer by the OpenOffice PMC: "Yes (speaking for the OpenOffice project). See http://openoffice.apache.org/contributing-code.html " No further discussion needed on the OpenOffice dev list. The ongoing conversation can be read at: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ Regards, Andrea. [ ... ] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Dual licensing of patches and code
On 13-03-09, at 05:39 , Andrea Pescetti wrote: > The conversation below happened in public, but not on the OpenOffice public > lists. I believe it's good to record its outcome here on the OpenOffice dev > list too. Yes; thanks! > > Summary: > - Question from Jim Jagielski: "Is a contribution under ALv2 + MPL + LGPLv3+ > acceptable to both OpenOffice and LibreOffice (and Apache Software Foundation > and The Document Foundation)?" > - Answer by the OpenOffice PMC: "Yes (speaking for the OpenOffice project). > See http://openoffice.apache.org/contributing-code.html " Quite. > > No further discussion needed on the OpenOffice dev list. The ongoing > conversation can be read at: > http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ Thanks, Andrea, this is very useful. > > Regards, > Andrea. Best louis > > On 05/03/2013 Jim Jagielski wrote: >> >> On Mar 5, 2013, at 10:34 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote: >> >>> So far, I've rec'd an answer from AOO... I'd appreciate >>> an answer from TDF as well. >>> >>> On Mar 4, 2013, at 11:39 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote: >>> BTW, Please be sure that I'm on the CC list, so I get any and all responses :) On Mar 4, 2013, at 8:08 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote: > Hello there. > > This Email is being directed to the 2 controlling bodies of > the Apache OpenOffice Project and LibreOffice (TDF). You will > notice that I am sending this from my non-ASF account. > > Recently, at various conferences, I have been approached by > numerous people, both 100% volunteer as well as more "corporate" > affiliated, wondering if it was OK for them to submit code, > patches and fixes to both AOO and LO at the same time. In > general, these people have code that directly patches LO > but they also want to dual-license the code such that it > can also be consumed by AOO even if it requires work and > modification for it to be committed to, and folded into, > the AOO repo. My response has always been that as the > orig author of their code/patches/whatever, they can > license their contributions as they see fit. However, > I have been told that they have rec'd word that such > dual-licensed code would not be accepted by, or acceptable > to, either the AOO project and/or LO and/or TDF and/or > the ASF. > > Therefore, I am asking for official confirmation from > both projects and both entities that both projectsSo > are fully OK with accepting code/patches/etc that > are licensed in such a way as to be 100% consumable > by both projects. For example, if I have a code patch > which is dual-licensed both under LGPLv3 and ALv2, that > such a patch would be acceptable to both LO and AOO. > > Thank you. > >>> >> >> > > - > 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: Dual licensing of patches and code
The conversation below happened in public, but not on the OpenOffice public lists. I believe it's good to record its outcome here on the OpenOffice dev list too. Summary: - Question from Jim Jagielski: "Is a contribution under ALv2 + MPL + LGPLv3+ acceptable to both OpenOffice and LibreOffice (and Apache Software Foundation and The Document Foundation)?" - Answer by the OpenOffice PMC: "Yes (speaking for the OpenOffice project). See http://openoffice.apache.org/contributing-code.html " No further discussion needed on the OpenOffice dev list. The ongoing conversation can be read at: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ Regards, Andrea. On 05/03/2013 Jim Jagielski wrote: On Mar 5, 2013, at 10:34 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote: So far, I've rec'd an answer from AOO... I'd appreciate an answer from TDF as well. On Mar 4, 2013, at 11:39 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote: BTW, Please be sure that I'm on the CC list, so I get any and all responses :) On Mar 4, 2013, at 8:08 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote: Hello there. This Email is being directed to the 2 controlling bodies of the Apache OpenOffice Project and LibreOffice (TDF). You will notice that I am sending this from my non-ASF account. Recently, at various conferences, I have been approached by numerous people, both 100% volunteer as well as more "corporate" affiliated, wondering if it was OK for them to submit code, patches and fixes to both AOO and LO at the same time. In general, these people have code that directly patches LO but they also want to dual-license the code such that it can also be consumed by AOO even if it requires work and modification for it to be committed to, and folded into, the AOO repo. My response has always been that as the orig author of their code/patches/whatever, they can license their contributions as they see fit. However, I have been told that they have rec'd word that such dual-licensed code would not be accepted by, or acceptable to, either the AOO project and/or LO and/or TDF and/or the ASF. Therefore, I am asking for official confirmation from both projects and both entities that both projectsSo are fully OK with accepting code/patches/etc that are licensed in such a way as to be 100% consumable by both projects. For example, if I have a code patch which is dual-licensed both under LGPLv3 and ALv2, that such a patch would be acceptable to both LO and AOO. Thank you. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
