Daniel Carrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Jeremy Hankins wrote:
>> Thanks for the direct link. A lot of folks prefer the actual text to >> be posted as well, though. It makes things easier for those (like >> myself) who are behind slow connections or even read mail offline. > > Heh. Just goes to show how different people will reach different > conclusions from the same premises. At OpenOffice.org you get told to > be succinct and provide links out of consideration for people on slow > connections. :-) Yeah, I know what you mean. I think the reason for that stance here is that it's very hard to discuss anything intelligently without the license in front of you, so you're pretty much obligated to fire up a browser and look it up anyway. Besides, I've personally noticed that messages that include the license get more attention and are more likely to avoid certain silly misunderstandings. >> Did you mean to skip the second issue -- that of having to purge names? > > Yes, because I don't have a solution for it. At first sight, it looks like > it may be something where Debian and CC just won't agree. Possibly, but it depends on what they're trying to accomplish. The case we're worried about that seems most egregious (e.g., a biography, and you're required to purge the name of the subject because he happens to have contributed some material and he doesn't like the result) is probably not intentional. The rest is a bit greyer, and it's quite possible that if we understood the motivation behind that bit we'd be able to come to some sort of compromise. If it's limited to purging it from the list of authors, for example, that might be more workable. (Thoughts from others on this?) -- Jeremy Hankins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> PGP fingerprint: 748F 4D16 538E 75D6 8333 9E10 D212 B5ED 37D0 0A03 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
