Re: Proposed plan (and license) for the webpage relicensing
On Wed, 19 Apr 2006, Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña wrote:
> In summary: The web pages license content should be changed from the
> OPL (non DFSG-free) to some other license (DFSG-free). As it is, the
> current content is not GPL compatible (so it cannot be reused, for
> example, in documentation produced by the DDP project).
>
> This issue was brought up last in October 2005 to the SPI board and they said
> (based on the IRC log [2] there doesn't seem to be any minutes) that
> debian-www should tell them what to do. I don't find any other references to
> this in the SPI Board archives.
>
> So, Here's the plan I propose:
>
> a) a proper license should be decided for the website.
>
> I suggest using a BSD-style license. The attached license is such a
> license. It is based on the FreeBSD documentation license [3] and
> explicitely mentions translations. In our case (the website) the
> 'source code' is the wml, but I leave references to other sources (SGML,
> XML) that might apply to other documentation that the website might hold.
Should we decide to change the license, we should either use the MIT
license if we don't want it to be copyleft, or the GPL if we do. A
custom license is not something that we want to write, and especially
not without serious thought and consideration between people who have
a great deal of experience in writing licenses.
Contributing to license proliferation by a license which is not
compatible with the GPL and some other free software licenses is not
something that we want to do.
Don Armstrong
--
"There's nothing remarkable about it. All one has to do is hit the
right keys at the right time and the instrument plays itself."
-- Bach
http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu
Reply to: