openoffice-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Guy Waterval <>
Subject Re: Double licence ALv2.0 and CC-BY-SA 3.0
Date Wed, 11 Mar 2015 18:16:51 GMT
Hi Dennis,
Hi all,

2015-03-11 17:53 GMT+01:00 Dennis E. Hamilton <>:

> Is it correct to assume that we are speaking of documentation


> and, specifically, material for the wiki and web site?

> If the idea is to maintain the core material on only one place, you need
> to decide what is the upstream source.  It seems to me that means the place
> with the most-permissive licensing.  Namely, the AOO sites.
I explore the possibility to migrate my original works actually under
ALv2.0 to fr Wikipedia under a double licence ALv2.0 and their licence
CC-BY-SA 3.0 and as wikibooks. It will be a big work and will require their
help because I have never use a wiki, but I will have the time to learn how
it's works ;-).
To put the work on a wiki Apache has no sense, nobody will improve an fr
documentation here. See what happens with the original en documentation
project. The issue is to proceed so that the doc stays under a double
licence and could not evoluate with the improvements in a doc under the
single licence of wikip├ędia. I will only outsource my work in a place where
it has more chance to be improve.



  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message