On 7/7/07, David Joyner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I'm happy with the > Attribution-ShareAlike Creative Commons license: > http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0/ > I think there is also a GPL Documentation license which is > similar. > > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > On 7/7/07, Martin Albrecht <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > do we have a license on the SAGE Wiki content? I am not so firm when it > > comes > > to documentation licenses, but basically I would like it to be as open as > > possible, e.g. it should be possible to put Wiki content in a book (with > > proper credits). How about the documentation in general?
Regarding the pdf documents, David Joyner is the principal author of the constructions documents, and he and I are the main authors of the tutorial. I'm the main author of the install guide and programming guide (though Ifti B. and others have done a lot of work improving the programming guide). I think it will be good if we do the following: (1) I propose that David and I explicitly license all the current "paper" documentation under the the Creative Commons license that David suggested above (though version 3.0, probably, since it's newer: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/ -- this site doesn't work for me right now). (2) We do so by including a statement to this effect in some sort of page at the beginning of the tex file for each document, and this change be included in the (long overdue -- sorry!) SAGE-2.7 release. (3) We state also that by making an explicit contribution to the SAGE wiki or the SAGE documentation, that ones contribution is licensed under the Create Commons 3.0 license. This should be prominently displayed on the SAGE wiki home page. (4) Nonetheless, regarding (3), we still worry about getting explicit license statements, especially for large contributions. (5) We apply the same approach to JSAGE: http://www.sagemath.org/jsage/ Yes, JSAGE is currently "dead", but I'm certain it will turn out to be very important in the long run, once I figure out how to really make it useful. In fact, I think perhaps the best thing would be something like this page: http://www.math.uiuc.edu/Macaulay2/Publications/ but for every publication there would be an additional 5 page (or so) paper that we have with additional code, examples, etc. I.e., JSAGE would be like an extremely annotated bibliography of the use of SAGE in mathematical research. By the way, the middle of this page: http://www.math.uiuc.edu/Macaulay2/ has a fascinating quote by 2006 Fields Medalist Andrei Okounkov calling for "funding agencies" to fund non-commercial math software. (David Joyner -- should we put that quote in our NSF white paper?) > > Thoughts? > > Martin Thanks for asking before it's too late. Now is a great time to clarify the situation. -- William --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://sage.scipy.org/sage/ and http://modular.math.washington.edu/sage/ -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
