Hello, On Sun, 2008-04-06 at 19:35 +0100, Jon Dowland wrote: > What would be the ideal license for content at > wiki.debian.org?
BSD 2 clause license your proposing seems fairly good, but I not a license expert. However, the ideal license would allow sharing the content with other documentations. 1. Share contents with Debian documentation (listed below), because some document could be started on the wiki and published later on those media : www.debian.org OPL>= draft v1 Debian New Maintainers' Guide : GPL>=2 Debian Policy Manual : GPL>=2 Debian Developer's Reference : GPL>=2 Debian GNU/Linux Installation Guide : GPL v2 Debian Reference : GPL >=2 etc. 2. Linux distributions share their software package, but not the documentation... what a bad habit (This may change some day, so we should avoid setting-up barriers). It would be great to be able to fork distro-specific documents from other source, like : wikipedia.org : GFDL >= 1.2 wiki.ubuntu.com : CC-SA 2.5 Generic (??) gentoo-wiki.com : Public Domain by default. wiki.netbsd.se : unclear. wiki.freebsd.org: no license fount. wiki.fedora.com : OPL v1 wiki.centos.org : CC-SA 3.0 Unported > I'd like to keep this discussion separate from the > significant issues of how a license change would be > achieved. Ok. > I believe a DFSG compatible license is desirable Sounds reasonable. > and I'd like to suggest the 2-clause BSD license. I like the concept of "The source code must be available" of the GPL. Under BSD-2-clauses, If someone modifies and publish a book, then the author may not "give back" it's modifications "as source", right ? Franklin P.S. In case some doesn't knows it yet... some DFSG and non-DFSG licenses are listed here : http://wiki.debian.org/DFSGLicenses -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
