Previous message appears to have been borked by a combination of Nabble/Mailman's dodgy header-detecting logic. Sorry if you only got half of it.
<goldie_lookin_chain_impersonating_john_peel> I'll try again... </glcetc.> Steve, Andy and I discussed it (as the 'licence working group' of the day, though without the title) last year. >From memory - I thought it would be a valuable piece of "inclusion" - helping a large piece of the community feel listened to, despite the fact that their preferred option wasn't being adopted. Steve saw it as formalising the scheme on the wiki and was fine with it. I don't remember what Andy thought. There was never any intention to offer it as one of three options for relicensing, in the manner of "Do you vote for ODBL, CC-BY-SA, or PD?". Rather, it would be an additional box you could tick when/if you agreed to ODBL. Exactly the same as the wiki scheme, but the db user relationship is there. cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/SVN-rails_port-questions%3A-browse%2C-relicensing-tp21806732p21975678.html Sent from the OpenStreetMap - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. _______________________________________________ dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/dev
