Re: State of developers-reference
On Wed, Sep 09, 2009 at 04:52:30PM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> On 09/09/09 at 16:18 +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 09, 2009 at 04:04:16PM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> > > Choosing CC BY-SA would nicely conflict with our existing documentation,
> > > like the Debian new maintainer guide (GPL2+) or developers-reference
> > > (GPL2+). Wouldn't it be possible to use CC BY-SA with an additional
> > > clause allowing to switch to GPL2+?
> > >
> > > The french CeCILL license has such a clause (see 5.3.4 in
> > > http://www.cecill.info/licences/Licence_CeCILL_V2-en.txt).
> > Why are we discussing this, given that from early feedback it was more
> > or less clear that we do not want to go the wiki way for devref?
> That would apply to moving content from the wiki to dev-ref. If the wiki
> is CC BY-SA, and dev-ref is GPL2+, we have a problem.
Since we still are discussing wiki licensing, we should ask wiki people
to dual license its contents with GPL2+ and CeCILL.
Whatever reorganization of documentation we do, we will inherit some
GPL2+ contents. So having compatible license for wiki posted contents
are quite important.
FYI: I posted this request to email@example.com.