[ TL;DR: would you object re-licensing www.d.o content under dual
MIT/Expat + GPL-2 ? ]
Hi everybody,
as you might have noticed the webmasters have recently restarted [1]
the discussion on how to fix this and its "colleague" bug report,
#388141.
[1] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=388141#206
The initial idea was to separate two concerns: (a) obtaining permission
to re-license, (b) pick a license and do the re-licensing. The
separation has some appeal: we can fix #388141 without having to fight
over a license to fix this bug (#238245) first :-P
But it has the important drawback to expose us to a sort of "necessary
evil": either seek copyright assignment or seek a blanket permission to
relicense under a large set of licenses until we pick one (see [1] for
details).
We can avoid that by reaching consensus on a license before asking for
the re-licensing permission. Which is also a prerequisite to fix this
bug. If we can do that quickly we can avoid both the (not so) necessary
evil and the risk of losing the current momentum in fixing these issues
once and for all!
I've been asked to help in reaching consensus on the license choice, so
here we go.
Looking at past discussions in both #238245 and #388141, I believe there
can already be consensus on re-licensing www.debian.org content [2]
under a dual-license MIT/Expat + GPL version 2 or above. Would anyone
object such a choice?
[2] more precisely: all material under webwml, including original
content, translation, support scripts, etc)
The reasons of the above proposal are:
- According to my reading of past discussions, MIT and GPL-2 seem to be
viable choices with supporters on both camps
- The two licenses are compatible
- Dual licensing, introduced above, is to avoid having a default license
and an alternative choice; both apply
- The "or above", introduced above, is to give some future-proof-ness to
the copyleft side, given it supports it
(I understand some people have grudges with "or above" clauses; we can
drop it if anyone feel strongly about it)
What do you think?
Thanks for your attention,
Cheers.
PS I think it would help the discussion if we avoid comments that *only*
state "I'd rather go for $license". If you comment in that direction,
please also clarifies whether you'd be fine with the above option.
Also, please remind that the final word will be, as usual, up to the
actual contributors to the Debian website.
--
Stefano Zacchiroli zack@{upsilon.cc,pps.jussieu.fr,debian.org} . o .
Maître de conférences ...... http://upsilon.cc/zack ...... . . o
Debian Project Leader ....... @zack on identi.ca ....... o o o
« the first rule of tautology club is the first rule of tautology club »
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature