On 3/22/13 at 4:32 PM, chr...@plope.com (Chris McDonough) pronounced:
On Fri, 2013-03-22 at 22:07 +0200, Tshepang Lekhonkhobe wrote:
Why choose a non-commercial license[1]? This has the disadvantage of
disallowing, for example, Debian to distribute it[2], which would be
nice.
[1]: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/
[2]: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=640780.
At this point I'd like to change the docs license to a free license,
TBH. I had a delusion at some point that we'd need to protect it from
publishing shops that just scrape existing free docs and sell books
based on those docs without contributing anything back to the community,
which would compete with book sales from folks who do, but I think the
point is probably moot. It would be easiest to give the docs the same
license as the code, I guess, although I'd be interested in hearing
other opinions.
So out of all these licenses:
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/
...are you suggesting this one would be the best fit?
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/
--steve
--steve
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"pylons-devel" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to pylons-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to pylons-devel@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/pylons-devel?hl=en.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
