Jason Grout wrote: > David Joyner wrote: >> On Tue, Dec 29, 2009 at 10:35 PM, Jason Grout >> <jason-s...@creativetrax.com> wrote: >>> GFDL and CC-by-sa are not compatible with GPL, so if I wanted the notes >>> to be distributed with Sage (so the examples turn into doctests, etc.), >>> if I went with (1) or (2), I'd have to dual-license the notes with GPL. >> >> Can you explain why this is the case? If I wrote notes which retained all >> copyrights *except* distribution, and allowed unlimited free >> distribution, why would that >> *prevent* them from being distributed with a GPL program? By notes I mean >> text without code which is statically linked to Sage code. >> > > > You're right. I was wrong, basing my opinion on a message from a > Creative Commons email message, but further reading of the entire thread > showed that it was the *relicensing* of work between CC-by-sa and GPL > that wasn't okay, but inclusion of CC-by-sa work (or GFDL, if I > understand things correctly) in a GPL package is okay.
This is the thread I'm referring to in my paragraph immediately above: http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/cc-licenses/2007-July/005871.html Thanks, Jason -- To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URL: http://www.sagemath.org
