[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Revamping the debian-legal website (was Re: removing the debian-legal website stuff?

On Mon, 23 May 2005 19:20:42 -0400 Nathanael Nerode wrote:

> 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.

Yes, I think that MJ Ray's proposed text could be a starting point.

> 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.
> 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  licensing maintenance...)

Fully agreed!

> 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).

My preferred non-copyleft license is the Expat (a.k.a MIT) license:

> 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.

It's probably a good idea.

> ...
> 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.

This is really appreciated, indeed.  :-)

    :-(   This Universe is buggy! Where's the Creator's BTS?   ;-)
  Francesco Poli                             GnuPG Key ID = DD6DFCF4
 Key fingerprint = C979 F34B 27CE 5CD8 DC12  31B5 78F4 279B DD6D FCF4

Attachment: pgpI19WjJ6jd5.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: