Revamping the debian-legal website (was Re: removing the debian-legal website stuff?
Frank Lichtenfeld wrote:
>Since this hasn't really worked out I propose to delete this stuff again
>until someone comes up with a better idea how to better present the
>work of debian-legal.
It would really, really, really help if things like the currently-unofficial
debian-legal FAQ, some of the various FAQs about the GFDL, etc., were
integrated into the debian-legal website. Information about the freeness
"tests" we use, etc., is the sort of thing which belongs there. Also, I
really like the existing essay on the three categories of software, and the
comments about how our list differs from the FSF and OSI lists; I do *not*
want to lose that.
If you delete anything, *just* delete the summary list, and update the rest of
the page to reflect that. I think the official debian-legal website should
form more of an "About debian-legal, what we do, and how we do it" site.
Maybe we can put license summaries in later, but I think they're not the most
important thing there.
Remember to get appropriate copyright licenses from everyone whose FAQs you
integrate and to specifically put the page under those licenses (not just the
default OPI for the website), with appropriate copyright notices. We should
attempt to follow our own recommended best practices. (Which, incidentally,
is another thing to add to the website: best practices in copyright and
Oh -- what license would debian-legal like for its own web pages? I think the
main choice to make is copyleft (meaning GPL) or highly permissive (in which
case I don't care which one, but it would be good to settle on one
"preferred" one). I suggest highly permissive, because this site is going to
contain memes which we want to spread, and allowing unlimited reuse would
IMHO be good for that.
OK, after making all those suggestions, it's time to put my money where my
mouth is. I volunteer to do this work if nobody else wants to (or indeed to
do it with someone else if they do want to). I'll even put it on high
priority; I think I could get quite a lot done very quickly, since the
information exists, but just has to be integrated. However, I would need
website access of some sort in order to do that, which I don't have.