I do not work with your company On Fri, Jan 22, 2021, 2:33 PM Jean Weber <jeanwe...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Dennis, > > Thank you for the clear explanation of the situation with regard to a > possible user-docs effort external to AOO itself and what needs to be done > if the group wants to move in that direction. > > If I were 15 years younger (and not heavily involved in a different > project), I’d volunteer to do some of the setup work. But, instead; I’ll > just continue to make suggestions from the sidelines. > > Jean > > On Sat, 23 Jan 2021 at 02:31 Dennis Hamilton <orc...@msn.com> wrote: > > > The TL;DR: Creating an external AOOAuthors GitHub project for deriving > > documentation of current AOO releases is not difficult. Many of us could > > do that. It just takes some minimal initial organization and agreement > on > > the contributor mechanism, working languages, etc. > > > > At some point soon, this discussion should move off of doc @ oo.a.o. It > > might be valuable to have some threads on the AOO Community Forum, < > > https://forum.openoffice.org/>. There also needs to be agreement on the > > working language(s) of an AOOAuthors project. > > > > I am waiting for Keith to say what approach he wants to see. Readers > of > > doc @ oo.a.o could also say what they would be willing to work on. Then > we > > can act jointly. > > > > DETAILS > > > > The ASF restriction on CC licensed material has to do with ASF Project > > source-code repositories. There is an exception for GPL, CC-by, and > other > > licenses if reliance on such artifacts is optional and the artifacts are > > fetched and included in the build process, never housed in an ASF Project > > repo. Note that this is about ASF Project governance. The ASF has > > principled project requirements beyond those of the Apache License > itself. > > (The preservation of OO.o documentation at < > > https://www.openoffice.org/documentation/> Is a variant on this idea.) > > > > In the case of documentation projects and their repositories, the > > exception is not workable. However, using an off-project repository > > employed outside of and *independent* of the AOO Project accomplishes the > > same purpose. The independence is important: there should be no > > accountability of the project to the AOO PMC and especially in AOO > reports > > to the ASF Board beyond mentioning the existence of such a project. Note > > that this already happens with extensions and templates where user > selects > > them and they have varied licenses. > > > > The independent-(GitHub-)project avenue, if still being pursued for > making > > AOO user documentation, is equivalent to how OooAuthors was external to > > OpenOffice.org and how Jean Weber's User Guide would be external and, in > > this case, a personal project. > > > > As a fork of OooAuthors documents, an AOOAuthors project need not > maintain > > dual licensing of the derivative AOO 4.x documentation. With appropriate > > notification and attribution of the original OOO documentation the > results > > could be offered under CC-BY unported, for example. That might be more > > palatable for AOO contributors that also become AOOAuthors contributors. > > Whatever the license choice(s), that has to be resolved immediately so > that > > contributors know what their license commitment must be. And for the > CC-BY > > case, specific attribution requirements should be in the front manner of > > the derived documents. > > > > There also needs to be enough AOOAuthors documentation of AOOAuthors so > > that people can learn how to follow the effort and how to contribute to > it. > > > > - Dennis > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Jean Weber <jeanwe...@gmail.com> > > Sent: Thursday, January 21, 2021 23:59 > > To: doc@openoffice.apache.org > > Subject: Re: New Doc Volunteer > > > > AOO does not allow CC licensed material. That's a major part of the > > problem of reuse. However, the body of documentation is also licensed > under > > GPL, which is sort-of allowed, with restrictions. > > > > Jean > > [ ... ] > > >
