Re: [tdf-discuss] Dual licensing of patches and code

Thanks for the reply, but the policy doesn't answer my specific question.

I have a patch which is written for LibreOffice. However,
I want to provide that patch to LO under both LGPLv3 AND ALv2.
Based *solely* on the fact that it is dual-licensed and
nothing else, is such a patch acceptable.

Dropping OpenOffice since they have already indicated that
the answer for them is YES.

And this is not a theoretical question. I have been
approached by people and companies stating that
they wish to help LO but want to provide their code
patches also under ALv2 (for internal legal reasons)
and have been told that TDF and LO refuses to accept such
code/patches/etc *simply* because it is dual/triple/quadruple
licensed under the ALv2.

tia.

On Mar 5, 2013, at 3:08 PM, Florian Effenberger <floeff@documentfoundation.org> wrote:

> Hello Jim,
>
> thank you for your e-mail. You'll find TDF's policy on this subject here: 
> https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/License_Policy
>
> Best,
> Florian
>
>
> Jim Jagielski wrote on 2013-03-05 18:32:
> > On Mar 5, 2013, at 10:34 AM, Jim Jagielski <jim@jaguNET.com> wrote:
> >
> > > So far, I've rec'd an answer from AOO... I'd appreciate
> > > an answer from TDF as well.
> > >
> > > On Mar 4, 2013, at 11:39 AM, Jim Jagielski <jim@jaguNET.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > BTW, Please be sure that I'm on the CC list, so I get
> > > > any and all responses :)
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Mar 4, 2013, at 8:08 AM, Jim Jagielski <jim@jaguNET.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hello there.
> > > > >
> > > > > This Email is being directed to the 2 controlling bodies of
> > > > > the Apache OpenOffice Project and LibreOffice (TDF). You will
> > > > > notice that I am sending this from my non-ASF account.
> > > > >
> > > > > Recently, at various conferences, I have been approached by
> > > > > numerous people, both 100% volunteer as well as more "corporate"
> > > > > affiliated, wondering if it was OK for them to submit code,
> > > > > patches and fixes to both AOO and LO at the same time. In
> > > > > general, these people have code that directly patches LO
> > > > > but they also want to dual-license the code such that it
> > > > > can also be consumed by AOO even if it requires work and
> > > > > modification for it to be committed to, and folded into,
> > > > > the AOO repo. My response has always been that as the
> > > > > orig author of their code/patches/whatever, they can
> > > > > license their contributions as they see fit. However,
> > > > > I have been told that they have rec'd word that such
> > > > > dual-licensed code would not be accepted by, or acceptable
> > > > > to, either the AOO project and/or LO and/or TDF and/or
> > > > > the ASF.
> > > > >
> > > > > Therefore, I am asking for official confirmation from
> > > > > both projects and both entities that both projectsSo
> > > > > are fully OK with accepting code/patches/etc that
> > > > > are licensed in such a way as to be 100% consumable
> > > > > by both projects. For example, if I have a code patch
> > > > > which is dual-licensed both under LGPLv3 and ALv2, that
> > > > > such a patch would be acceptable to both LO and AOO.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thank you.


-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+help@documentfoundation.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted