On 6/11/12 5:04 PM, Karl Berry wrote:
CC-BY-NC is OK for docsMichael, I don't believe that is correct, for the reason you point out: NC is "no commercial", which is nonfree, hence must not be allowed on savannah under any circumstances. As a separate point, "real" documentation (a manual) is supposed to be released under the FDL (or compatible permissive licenses). A few html files probably don't qualify, though. It's worth noting that the CC-BY-* licenses are GPL incompatible Although I don't believe it's ever been officially determined, I personally believe CC-BY itself is compatible with the GPL, because it only requires attribution, that is, is a permissive license. You were probably knowingly excluding that with "BY-*" instead of "BY*" :), but just for putative clarity :). It's the "SA" (sharealike) versions which are copylefts and hence incompatible with the GPL (another copyleft). And, as discussed, the "NC" (and "ND") versions are nonfree and shouldn't be used in savannah-hosted projects. Aside from all of the above, I agree with the point about it always being better to include a license statement in the source files, for clarity. karl
Indeed, I stand corrected.
