-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Owen Winkler wrote:
> I have a couple of policy issues to start a conversation about:
> Let's limit the extras plugin to ASL-licensed projects only. Authors of
> themes and plugins will have two options: 1) Retain their authorship
> and copyright with the knowledge that anyone with access to the extras
> repo can modify their work under the license, and also add themselves to
> the copyright (using a technical method yet to be coded). 2) Attribute
> the plugin or theme to the community and in doing so explicitly give up
> their copyright on the work under the same ASL provisions. The only
> appropriate place for copyright attribution is in the theme metadata
> (theme.xml) or in the plugin metadata (the info function) for plugins
> and themes submitted to the extras repo. We should note that themes
> that use pre-coded affiliate links or self-links in the public site
> (whether you can turn them off or not) should not be submitted, and if
> they are, they will most likely be edited to remove those links under
> the above terms of use for the repository. These are the conditions for
> using the extras repository only, not for pluggables in general.
Perhaps it would make sense to have a separate -extras (for third-party
"owned") and -contrib (for donated). This would make it easy for users
to see, at glance, the difference between the two. This may make it
possible to actually separate -extras into multiple branches to allow
other licenses, which would give us the ability to have a central
location to include ports from OBT themes and plugins that are GPL (or
other OSS Licenses). We would have to make it very clear that the
- -extras branch is simply _hosted_ by Habari, not "supported" by Habari.
Then -contrib branch would require only ASL licensed add-ons, and
perhaps would require an agreement such as the
http://www.apache.org/licenses/icla.txt Individual Contributor License
Agreement. Additionally, a standard NOTICE file for -contrib
contributions would be worth exploring. Obviously, I'm not a lawyer, but
I think keeping this separation would be wise from a liability
standpoint if there are any questions regarding copyright.
I think, in general, we've reached a level of stability that formalizing
some of our policies is warranted, and we're rapidly reaching a level of
interest that we'll need to be sure we're all on the same page in
responding to questions of policy.
> I would also like to start a conversation about a support forum. There
> are people who want to help in that regard, and there is a slowly
> growing number of people coming into the project that would seem to
> benefit from a low-impact forum, with all of the features that forums
> typically provide, as opposed to the users mailing list. I would like
> to conclude this conversation with what software we'd use for the forum,
> or what we're going to do instead if decide not to setup a forum so that
> we can have something to act on.
> As more people become interested and participate, it will be difficult
> to make changes to these items, so I think that addressing them as soon
> as possible will be of benefit.
I'm +1 on getting a forum into place. I'd suggest that we're best off
going with a forum software that A)can integrate with our existing HP.o
logins B) is software that we, as a community, are familiar with. We're
trying to create a blogging app, not learning new software from scratch.
- --
Sean T. Evans
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFIJx/GmQpMBUWJpdsRAsrBAJ9HePZCfm58nCG3N3OBn6Uni9aqhQCgkKp+
ae9U5A6BeG/kYh8g9Nx2+ME=
=f0EN
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----