Daniel is discussing licenses for OOoAuthors work:
The only reason why we have been using [the PDL] is because it was the only
license OOo would allow for documentation. To pick anything else would
mean that the files could not go to the OOo website.

However...
The Community Council just approved the use of the Creative
Commons Attribution license for non-editable material (like PDF files):

http://council.openoffice.org/servlets/ReadMsg?list=discuss&msgNo=564
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/
<snip>
Changing license is not a decision we should take lightly, though. But
there are very strong reasons why we might want to. Furthermore, *if* we
are going to change license, the time to do it is *now*, before the 2.0
release.

Do you think we should start a discussion about the idea of changing
licenses to the Creative Commons Attribution ?

I definitely think we should discuss this idea, so I'll start. :-)

In a follow-up note, Daniel said:

Some pros for switching:
 * Because most people don't use PDL, our work is inside a "walled garden"
   and can't be embedded into other work.

   In contrast, the CC community is large and growing.

 * The PDL is inconvenient to use. <snip>

   In contrast, the CC attribution license is really easy to use.

Some cons:
 * The switch would require rewriting any chapter whose owner cannot
   be located.

Here is my opinion.

I think we should seriously discuss changing the license under which we're publishing docs, and using a CC license. I know I would be happier with a CC license -- both as a contributor and as an editor (the latter because of trying to keep track of who has done what). I agree with Daniel's "pros"; these are good reasons for switching.

Regarding Daniel's "con", I suspect that most of the chapters in that category (owner cannot be located) probably need rewriting anyway for V2. One possible problem is Andrew Pitonyak's macros chapter; I'd have to ask him and the publisher if a license change is acceptable.

The main question is whether everybody who is contributing to V2 docs would be happy with the CC Attribution license (or at least more happy than with the PDL).

So, people, please speak up! In particular, does anyone object to the CC license, and if so why?

Cheers, Jean



Reply via email to