On Sun, Dec 16, 2012 at 11:45:21AM +0100, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > > It is now listed at > > http://datahub.io/dataset/debian-package-tracking-system - but > > annoyingly it is marked as " License Not Specified". > > Perhaps the question to ask is more who can decide on a license - the > project or those harvesting (i.e. the person(s) writing the actual > script)? The copyright owner for a collection is its "editor", i.e. the persons who decide what is part of the collection and what is not --- allegedly, that's where the creativeness resides. In this case, it seems fairly clear that the authors of the UDD importers are entitled to decide, collectively, a license. More precisely, it should be the code contributors who influenced the choices of what is part of UDD as of now, and what is not (e.g. code refactoring or, say, a better algorithm for an important shouldn't matter). Off the top of my memory that should then be Lucas, Christian, Andreas, possibly myself, and surely svn log will tell you more :-) Those who are on this list can please comment on adopting ODBL? FWIW, I agree with that choice. Cheers. -- Stefano Zacchiroli . . . . . . . zack@upsilon.cc . . . . o . . . o . o Maître de conférences . . . . . http://upsilon.cc/zack . . . o . . . o o Debian Project Leader . . . . . . @zack on identi.ca . . o o o . . . o . « the first rule of tautology club is the first rule of tautology club »
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature