On 07/18/2011 12:56 PM, Italo Vignoli wrote:
On 7/18/11 9:46 PM, Craig Olofson wrote:
Can someone please address this? I'd like to know where the decision was
made to reference only F/OSS-licensed templates and extensions.
This is something that we discussed before the initial announcement of
September 28, 2010. The license is quite important, if we want to build
a sound ecosystem around TDF. Of course, developers are free to choose a
different license, but in this case we cannot promote their work hosting
their extensions in our repository.
Thank you Italo.
This is a clear and sustainable policy and I am sure no one will be
surprised by it.
I also understand that this page will be the paramount reference point
for all templates & extensions in the entire LibreOffice ecosystem.
This is why we should make some accommodation on the page to developers
of extensions / templates which don't fall under GNU licensing.
The more inclusive and equitable this resource is towards the developer
and end-user communities, the more valuable of an asset it becomes to
TDF/LibO: more page-hits, more bookmarking and, ultimately, a more
direct link with the user-base.
Conversely, if we make no attempt to help end-users find what they
legitimately may be looking for then, the site is that much less
effective or sticky.
To have an idea of what I am proposing, we would change the wording
regarding licensing from:
LibreOffice remains committed to providing users with quality software
authored under free software licenses
<http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html>, and, as such, our
catalogue of extensions and templates are published under free
software licenses <http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html>.
to:
LibreOffice remains committed to providing users with quality software
authored under free software licenses
<http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html>, and, as such, we host
only extensions and templates which are published under free software
licenses <http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html>.
For extensions and templates provided under other licensing, we have
included a listing referencing their authors' respective sites.
In short, we will not host closed-source but we can reference it for the
good of the larger community. I believe this is preferable for two reasons:
* this site becomes a comprehensive resource to the community
* the conditions are an incentive for non-GNU developers to re-think
their licensing
* TDF actively demonstrates inclusiveness yet again.
Italo, thank you again for responding. And if this isn't the proper
forum for this thread, please point me in the right direction. I am
only now understanding how difficult it is to manage the volume of
messaging going on in this product.
Regards,
-Craig
--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to website+h...@global.libreoffice.org
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/website/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
