On Fri, Jun 3, 2011 at 23:48, Dennis E. Hamilton <dennis.hamil...@acm.org> wrote: > The extensive LibreOffice user-documentation project is producing > GPL3[+]/CC-by3.0 dual-licensed documents. I assume that CC-by is not toxic > for Apache, since it is the closest CC license to permissive (i.e., it is at > least as permissive as modified BSD) and it allows derivative works, of > course.
We renamed the "Apache Software License, v1.1" to "Apache License, v2.0" for the basic reason that we wanted to cover documentation, too. AFAIK, all documentation coming out of the ASF is licensed under ALv2. Would we be okay with CC licenses? Unsure, to be honest. I think that we certainly could be okay with it: certain forms of the CC license palette match our permissive ideals, and they are also modern, well-considered licenses. I'm not sure the question has come up, so we have no policy that I'm aware of. Cheers, -g --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
