I had the GNU FDL and the Open Publication License in mind. (I am not suggesting anything about the relative merits of the licenses. I am just interested in the rationale, because I have not studied the documentation licenses carefully myself, but I would like to learn about them.)
Some thoughts:
The FDL has various problems, as the Free Software Foundation's idea of free-ness when it comes to documentation seems to be different to their idea of free-ness for software.
It also seems that Creative Commons has the most momentum in this area, and so there is likely to be more compatible text.
Another consideration was that, to avoid licensing problems even within the site, we wanted to keep the number of permitted licenses small. With CC, we can do that, but still allow people to copyleft their text or not as they choose.
Gerv _______________________________________________ mozilla-documentation mailing list [email protected] http://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/mozilla-documentation
