Re: Team book licensing and editorial process
On Sun, 12 Jan 2025 15:07, Blair Noctis <ncts@debian.org> wrote:
Hi team,
Seeing the book is catching up (https://rust-team.pages.debian.net/book/ if you didn't know), I'd like to ask you to help formalize some aspects of it.
== Licensing
Content of the book is not entirely new: the policy section is copied over from the [wiki], mainly written by Josh Triplett and Ximin Luo (thus sending to you); the packaging process (for single crates) from readme.rst in the debcargo-conf repo, mainly written by Ximin Luo and Sylvestre Ledru (thus sending to you); the rust_hacks.md document also in the dc-c repo, mainly by Matthias Geiger (thus sending to you); with occasional contributions from a few others.
I hereby license all my contributions as CC-BY-SA-4.0.
There was, however, no clear licensing on any of them, AFAICT. They
seem to have been written and shared on a "being useful" ground. I took
them into the book for the same purpose. Now that we have a
concentrated documentation effort, I'd like to ask for your opinions
and permissions on a proper license of the book. I'd suggest
CC-BY-SA-4.0 since it's documentation, not code (albeit some small
examples in it).
== Editorial process
Rust has a good tradition of well written documentation, we as a team dealing with Rust things should continue that tradition. Alas, well written means careful and thoughtful wording and thorough understanding of matters covered. We need a more or less formal editorial process, with reviews and proofreading. I propose we create an editor group for "quality assurance" and reviewing submitted changes, somewhat like maintainers of the book "package".
This is something we should discuss at the next meet imho.
Submitting changes is probably only feasible through merge requests,
likewise questions/reports through issues, it's not a real package so
no BTS. This might turn down some potential contributors that dislike
salsa (it has CLIs, but).
Give that the repo lives on salsa I see no issue here. While personally
I wish the projecct had chosen another forge it is the de facto standard
for collaboration.
best,
werdahias
Reply to: