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

Is CC-BY-SA 2.0 acceptable?



Hi,

I'm the prospective maintainer of s5, a very simple HTML/CSS/JavaScript
presentation system, as witnessed by ITP #484485 and a sample package at
http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/s/s5/s5_1.1-1.dsc

Most of S5 is explicitly released into the public domain.  However, there
is a single file in a not-quite-essential part of the source tree that
has a CC BY-SA 2.0 license notice.  ISTR that a while ago there were
some discussions about some of the CC licenses not being quite free;
what is the current status of the CC BY-SA version 2.0 license?
I cannot find it in the list of licenses on the new copyright format page,
http://wiki.debian.org/Proposals/CopyrightFormat - is this simply
because no one has bothered to add it, or because it is actively
frowned upon?

The way I see it, there are two courses open to me now:
- just list the file and its license in debian/copyright;
- do a DFSG-repackaging of the source tree, removing the theme that
  contains this file, thus forfeiting a minor non-essential part of
  the S5 functionality.

Which of these would be more suited to The Debian Way?  Of course,
in both cases I will contact Eric Meyer, the upstream author, for some
clarification and possible dropping this license in future releases,
actually making the whole of S5 public-domain, as the docs say :)

G'luck,
Peter

-- 
Peter Pentchev	roam@ringlet.net    roam@cnsys.bg    roam@FreeBSD.org
PGP key:	http://people.FreeBSD.org/~roam/roam.key.asc
Key fingerprint	FDBA FD79 C26F 3C51 C95E  DF9E ED18 B68D 1619 4553
I am not the subject of this sentence.

Attachment: pgpG05iwlZKKS.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: