We are discussing about the trouble of switching from CCBYSA to
ODBl 1.0. Many people fear the short time given to review this
new license,
May be the FAQ should point out what could be the trouble to
switch from ODBL 1.0 to ODBl 2.0, just in case some oversight
become evident in the future.
May be the FAQ should point out what could be the trouble to
switch from ODBL 1.0 to ODBl 2.0, just in case some oversight
become evident in the future.
I would be very keen to take a leaf out of the GPL world here, and license the
data under
ODBL 1.0 or later. That means if and when 2.0 comes
On Thu, 5 Mar 2009 03:33:45 -0800 (PST), Donald Allwright
donald_allwri...@yahoo.com wrote:
I would be very keen to take a leaf out of the GPL world here, and
license
the data under
ODBL 1.0 or later. That means if and when 2.0 comes out (which it
surely
will) the data are automatically
I would be very keen to take a leaf out of the GPL world here, and
license
the data under
ODBL 1.0 or later. That means if and when 2.0 comes out (which it
surely
will) the data are automatically
covered by the new version. When 2.0 does come out, that changes to ODBL
2.0 or later for all
On Thu, Mar 5, 2009 at 11:33 AM, Donald Allwright
donald_allwri...@yahoo.com wrote:
I would be very keen to take a leaf out of the GPL world here, and license
the data under
ODBL 1.0 or later. That means if and when 2.0 comes out (which it surely
will) the data are automatically
covered by
Hi,
Donald Allwright wrote:
I would be very keen to take a leaf out of the GPL world here, and license
the data under
ODBL 1.0 or later.
I am surprised that none of the respondents seem to have read the
license draft which clearly states that a later version of this
license is allowable,
On Thu, Mar 05, 2009 at 02:05:36PM +0100, Frederik Ramm wrote:
I am surprised that none of the respondents seem to have read the
license draft which clearly states that a later version of this
license is allowable, as is a license compatible with this license.
I read the license, and
Frederik Ramm frederik at remote.org writes:
I am surprised that none of the respondents seem to have read the
license draft which clearly states that a later version of this
license is allowable, as is a license compatible with this license.
Hmm, I would prefer it if they didn't put that in
On Thu, Mar 05, 2009 at 03:33:45AM -0800, Donald Allwright wrote:
I would be very keen to take a leaf out of the GPL world here, and license
the data under
ODBL 1.0 or later.
The GPL gives the licensor the choice (section 14. Revised Versions of
this License.[1]):
“If the Program
9 matches
Mail list logo
