Date: prev next · Thread: first prev next last
2011 Archives by date, by thread · List index

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 <>, and, as such, our catalogue of extensions and templates are published under free software licenses <>.
LibreOffice remains committed to providing users with quality software authored under free software licenses <>, and, as such, we host only extensions and templates which are published under free software licenses <>.

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.


Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to
Posting guidelines + more:
List archive:
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted


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.