In order to reduce entropy from the documentation project thread, I've edited my post and moved the stuff that was just clutter to this blog post, for future reference.
----

(starts here)

Not wanting to overdo my time on this soapbox/post, but I think that it would be best to create a project that completes OpenFOAM's existence, rather than creating another clone. Unless, of course, those willing to create the fork actually want to evolve it's infrastructure to a new level...

I've been broiling over my head an idea, that contemplates the Trademark/legal issues, and gives the community that uses OpenFOAM technology the best base for development. Not that I'm a fan of the French, but this keeps popping up in my head: Which is pretty much what the OpenFOAM community is asking for!

So, in a blatant attempt to respect GPL, GFDL, Trademark and Legal issues; keeping in mind Alberto's post #96, but without giving a burden to OpenCFD(R); and still keeping true to the OpenFOAM technology, I propose the following project - MousseOuvert: a project built by the people and for the people that use OpenFOAM technology. The idea is to add to MousseOuvert all of the contributions done over the years, version discriminated (1.4.1, 1.5, 1.5.x, etc), over the various projects that are related to OpenFOAM (-dev,-extend,-mswin,freefoam,of-interfaces, where possible), both code and documents, under GPL and GFDL respectively. It would still be linked to OpenFOAM's official code as basis (i.e., not include the overhead of the release/git version inside MousseOuvert), but also act as a collective user folder, thus having something like this on each OpenFOAM installation:
As GPL and GFDL states, authorship should and would be kept, respected and (docu)commented; and the community would have the freedom to state whether the documentation is about OpenFOAM technology and/or the MousseOuvert project's components.

This way, I believe, should allow a centralized plug-in like system, that could work with OpenFOAM or any of the forks available, and be compatible with wmake and cmake build models! And keep things simple for users and developers!

Documentation and code can still be peer reviewed: just have a stable (peer reviewed) and experimental (unreviewed) branches/folders of MousseOuvert.

Because I believe that if we use properly "code and documentation done by users and developers using OpenFOAM technology", keep GFDL in doc's as well as Trademark references, and all the other things OpenCFD's trademark policy states, then this should be doable without OpenCFD having to ever unleash their legal team


Otherwise, I'm starting to see that any of the projects that have "foam/FOAM" in their names (except for openfoam-dev, which I think is owned by one of the copyrighters of OpenFOAM) are liable to a law suit in the near future; as well as the opensourcecfd.com website, which is a blatant play on words of OpenCFD's trademark corporate name!! Of course the Free Source Foundation could also step in and sue OpenCFD for infringing the GPL and GDFL licenses, due to over-enforcing of their Trademark policy... since FSF starts with Free, not just Open.


Oops, I'm sorry for the lengthy post... but this is just my personal opinion and conclusion, over a long period of thinking over this legal predicament and community uprising.

(...)

-----
Disclaimer: (This was still part of the post...)
Oh, and you can use the non-trademark (I think it isn't) MousseOuvert for whatever purposes you wish, whether it's dessert or code