On Friday 04 February 2005 12:17, Thomas R. Koll wrote: > On Fri, Feb 04, 2005 at 11:48:06AM +0100, Craig Bradney wrote: > > On Friday 04 February 2005 11:24, Thomas R. Koll wrote: > > > On Fri, Feb 04, 2005 at 09:30:09AM +0100, Craig Bradney wrote: > > > > On Friday 04 February 2005 08:44, Thomas R. Koll wrote: > > > > > Other question: Why a by-nc instead of by-sa? It will get a problem > > > > > for publishers using parts of the docs. > > > > > > > > Exactly the idea. > > > > > > Then we should include parts of the wiki into the Scribus package. > > > > We already include Scribus documentation in the package.. which we intend > > to be different to that on the wiki. > > Sorry, I meant: > Then we should not include parts of the wiki into the Scribus package. > The by-nc is considered incompatible by the Debian staff and we surely > would get problems with that. > And if we can't include the docs from the wiki, then the wiki makes less > sense.
Its only Debian with its interesting ideas that does this. The Debian 1.2.1 version of Scribus already does not include the documentation but there is a documentation package in the non-free packages of Debian. All the other distros are quite happy to package as we do. Craig -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://nashi.altmuehlnet.de/pipermail/scribus/attachments/20050204/016b32ce/attachment.pgp
