Hi Cactus ! I think we should use the GNU FDL for instance.
See ya ! Em Sexta 17 Junho 2005 23:12, cactus escreveu: > I was just wondering if there is a standard license used for the > archlinux documentation. In addition, what kind of license should be > used for the wiki? > > MediaWiki supports options for placment of two different documentation > licenses in the information section at the bottom of the page when in > the "edit" page interface. By support, I mean you can select between two > of them at install time, and it snags the url and name for placement in > the edit interface (and also a logo/link in the general site footer). > > The two supported by default are the Gnu Free Documentation License, and > the Creative Commons license. http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/fdl.html and > http://creativecommons.org/licenses/ respectively. > > Some additional information from wikipedia, about the licenses themselves. > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_Free_Documentation_License > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creative_Commons_License > > As a further reference, wikipedia uses the GNU Free Documentation > License in their wiki, as do many other wikis (gentoo for example). > > _______________________________________________ > arch mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch -- Douglas Soares de Andrade http://douglasandrade.cjb.net - dsa at unilestemg.br UnilesteMG - www.unilestemg.br ICQ, MSN = 76277921, douglas at tuxfamily.org _______________________________________________ arch mailing list [email protected] http://www.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch
