Signed PGP part
Hi Jan,
why cannot Björn's contributions be licensed under CC-0 or under Public
Domain? Doug - for example - chose WTFL... Technically this is possible!
It's the same if somebody wants to use APLv2. It is compatible with our
license and it totally valid.
Not again, sorry.
Look at:
https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/Developers#Example_Statement
<https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/Developers#Example_Statement>
that is the current rulebook, for development exclusively use MPLv2/LGPLv3+ dual license
The ESC can change that rule, but until then, that is how we work with our development repos.
Other types of work is less my concern, but there is an ongoing discussion about how documentation
should be licensed.
rgds
jan I.
Context
Privacy Policy |
Impressum (Legal Info) |
Copyright information: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images
on this website are licensed under the
Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License.
This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is
licensed under the Mozilla Public License (
MPLv2).
"LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are
registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are
in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective
logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use
thereof is explained in our
trademark policy.