On 05/05/2016 04:01 PM, Davanum Srinivas wrote:
Ben,
Have you seen this yet?
http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/legal-discuss/2014-March/000201.html
https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Governance/Foundation/15Oct2012BoardMinutes#Approval_of_the_CCBY_License_for_Documentation.
No I hadn't seen this. It's helpful to know that there is official
support from the board for using the CCBY license but it's unclear what
that's supposed to look like, since I can't find a single project that's
converted their whole specs repo to the new license.
My confusion comes from how to handle the existing Apache 2.0 stuff in
the cookie cutter. I can't just drop the Apache 2.0 license... The only
obvious path forward is to create a gross mess like the existing specs
repos have where there's a mix of the 2 licenses and it's not clear
which license applies to what.
-Ben
Thanks,
Dims
On Thu, May 5, 2016 at 3:44 PM, Ben Swartzlander <b...@swartzlander.org> wrote:
On 05/05/2016 03:24 PM, Jeremy Stanley wrote:
On 2016-05-05 12:03:38 -0400 (-0400), Ben Swartzlander wrote:
It appears that many of the existing specs repos contain a
confusing mixture of Apache 2.0 licensed code and Creative Commons
licensed docs.
[...]
Recollection is that the prose was intended to be under CC Attrib.
in line with official documentation, while any sample source code
was intended to be under ASL2 so that it could be directly used in
similarly-licensed software. We likely do a terrible job of
explaining that though, and maybe dual-licensing everything in specs
repos makes more sense? This might also be a better thread to have
on the legal-discuss@ ML.
We may ultimately need to consult legal experts, but I was hoping that we
already had a clear guideline for specs licensing and it was merely being
applied inconsistently. I figured the TC would know if a decision had been
made about this.
I also have a feeling that dual-licensing would be the least-likely-to-fail
option, however I haven't seen examples of how to properly dual-license a
repo in OpenStack so I wasn't going to jump to that option first.
-Ben Swartzlander
__________________________________________________________________________
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
__________________________________________________________________________
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
