On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 11:11:48PM +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> 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?
One week into this, it seems no one objected. Most comments have been in
favor of this choice; one comment (by Francesco) would prefer a
different wording but would pick a functionally equivalent license
(MIT/Expat alone). Thanks to everybody.
It seems we've consensus on the license choice \o/
On Sat, Jan 21, 2012 at 12:57:59PM -0400, David Prévot wrote:
> +Since @@day@@ January 2012, the new material can be redistributed
> +and/or modified under the terms of the <a href="legal/licenses/mit">\
> +MIT (Expat) License</a> (which is usually available at
> +<url http://www.jclark.com/xml/copying.txt>) or, at your option, of the
> +<a href="legal/licenses/gpl2">GNU General Public License</a>; either
> +version??2 of the License, or any later version (the latest version is
^^^
as a minor nitpick, I would add "(at your option)" here.
Looking forward for David to push the big red button :-)
Cheers.
--
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