I suppose that the long-term goal here, as for stackoverflow.com itself, is for the site to provide answers to 'practical, answerable' questions. Relatively concrete solutions to relatively concrete problems.
Other than licensing, where might these come from?
We are already seeing some 'community-building' questions. While they can be a bit squishy, the squish can be controlled by applying the standard that answers should be 'backed up' with concrete personal experience.
One could also imagine some 'community destruction' questions, if you'll excuse a humorous way of thinking about forking.
We've seen some questions about the intersection of technologies (version control, testing, build systems) with open source collaboration. From one point of view, an open source project is just an example of a bunch of people scattered all over try to collaborate, so those questions might be viewed as off-topic, but, again, if they are worded to ask for backed-up practical answers, why not?
The recent AV question is again one which straddles a line between 'specific to open source' and 'generic to products with a small(er) audience.'
There's the department of 'how can I make a living building open source.' In my opinion, these would be great if we got answers from people who actually make a living doing open source, and not just people copying and pasting ideology or second-hand stories.
A common theme here is that the range of workable questions depends, ultimately, on the availability of actual experts to answer them. Where by 'expert' I merely mean, 'someone with relevant, practical, personal, experience.'