[Plone-com] We need a new modern theme for plone.com.
jonstahl at gmail.com
Sat Sep 8 09:09:48 UTC 2012
> +1 Speaking of that: IIUC, we can move content from plone.org to plone.com,
> if it's not in the documentation area because all contributed documentation
> there is owned by the respective author. I could be wrong, but that approach
> makes sense to me. Ultimately I suppose all contributed content on plone.org
> is owned by the respective author, but their is (or should be?) a
> distinction between "Plone organization generated content" and "user
> generated content".
> CC'ing the board in case there is anything they can do to help. Dear PF
> Board: we desperately need to sort out all of the content ownership of
> plone.org/documentation, even if that means contacting each of the
> individual authors. I suspect it also means the Plone Contributor Agreement
> needs to have a "contributed documentation" clause? Some folks are working
> on the new contributor agreement I think, so maybe they already have this
> covered (also CC: Jon Stahl, Eleddy)
Yes, this is definitely a real (and known) issue. I've thought about
this a bit, but have not actually implemented any solution, although
the board has passed a resolution stating that its goal is to move
docs to an open-source creative commons license.
As I see it, there are probably three elements to actually
implementing this goal:
1) Making it clear in the contributor agreement that contributed
documentation is also assigned to the PF.
2) Adding a TOS to Plone.org stating that any content/documentation
contributed to the site is made available under a CC license.
3) Contacting all authors of existing docs and saying, "Hey, unless
you object, we're going to assert that all your existing docs are CC
licensed. If that's not cool, let us know and we'll pull your docs."
More information about the Plone-com