Hi Chris,

I think the point here is not the ability of Cake Core Team providing
documentation or not. You guys are excellent and have been doing a
great job.

The point is: "Why can't I deal with the documentation on the same
terms I do with the software?"

Officially the MIT License allows me to host, copy, modify and
distribute (under few restrictions) the CakePHP source code.

Why Documentation is not treated on the same way? That's why, I
believe, Jonathan suggested a 3rd Party GPL'd licenced documentation.
If it were GPL or MIT, I could have done what I did without having
trouble with Cake Foundation through the person of its president Mr.
Woodworth.

I do not believe that a 3rd Party effort is the solution. I believe we
must stick with Cake Foundation and it's current effort for
documentation the awesome CakePHP.


Dérico

On Jun 19, 4:29 pm, "Chris Hartjes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 6/19/07, Jonathan Langevin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > I agree a central location would be best, but to also avoid any legal
> > issues, is why I suggested a 3rd party GPL effort
>
> So you seem to think that the CakePHP developers themselves
> (disclaimer: I am one of them) aren't capable of providing
> documentation?  Why does a 3rd party need to get involved?
>
> --
> Chris Hartjes
> Senior Developer
> Cake Development Corporation
>
> My motto for 2007:  "Just build it, damnit!"
>
> @TheBallpark -http://www.littlehart.net/attheballpark
> @TheKeyboard -http://www.littlehart.net/atthekeyboard


--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Cake 
PHP" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/cake-php?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to