[libreoffice-website] Re: LibreOffice-Extensions-Template-Website

Le 2011-07-03 08:45, Andreas Mantke a écrit :
> Hi Andrea, *,
>
> Am Sonntag, 3. Juli 2011, 14:13:56 schrieb Andrea Pescetti:
> > Andreas Mantke:
> > > Am Montag, 27. Juni 2011, 19:02:42 schrieb Andrea Pescetti:
> > > > For usability, I'd prefer not to have a default here. Otherwise, people
> > > > may overlook the field and it might well happen that someone uploads an
> > > > extension that gets tagged as "GPL" but actually has (within the OXT
> > > > file) a totally different license.
> > >
> > > I changed the field, in which the contributor choose the license, from
> > > drop down to radio format. I added also a warning text to the
> > > description of the field:
> > > http://andreasmaooo.blogger.de/stories/1848120/
> >
> > Thanks Andreas, this is a significant improvement: sloppy authors will
> > now have to be aware of that field.
> >
> > It's unfortunate that something released with the same license as the
> > LibreOffice new files cannot be uploaded properly due to the need to
> > choose only one license, but limitations due to the tools (something
> > that I cannot understand in general) will maybe be overcome in future.
>
> maybe we can later on add one or more fields for license, so that one could choose
> two or three licenses for the same file. I write this on my todo-list for the future
> ;-)
>
> > Coming to the contents, I have 3 questions about your screenshot:
> > - "Freeware" will block the upload, right? I.e., if someone chooses
> >    "Freeware" then the extension submission will be refused.
> > - Why is "Commercial License" in the list? GPL, LGPL and the other
> >    options listed are (also) commercial licenses, so it's redundant.
> > - I don't really want to start any discussions about this, but I'm not
> >    aware of a large number of extensions distributed under the "Zope
> >    Public License" while I would, say, expect that there will be
> >    extensions contributed under the Apache License. Of course the Apache
> >    License can fit in the category of "Approved by OSI" and "Approved by
> >    FSF", but maybe it deserves its own option. If this has already been
> >    examined, just ignore it. The first extension I'm going to contribute
> >    is under GPLv3 anyway...
>
> I have not customized the list of licenses on my local box yet. We can decide which
> licenses we will provide on the plattform. The contributor can choose only between
> this licenses (the field is mandatory).
>
> Regards,
> Andreas

Suggestion:

Could we order the list in the preference that we would prefer? If some 
submitters are unsure of the licence they may then adopt the licence 
listed at the top of this list. We could then have the least favourable 
on the bottom of the list. We need to make it obvious the preference of 
licence.

Cheers

Marc


--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to website+help@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