Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] License for documentation
In general osgeo recommends use of Creative Commons license for documentation, in order afford writers the same "remix" culture we enjoy in our open source projects. The alternative is of course the writing practice of "quoting" and "citation" but does does not provide the same ability to format shift and otherwise enjoy playing with words. As example GeoTools license page: https://docs.geotools.org/latest/userguide/welcome/license.html It is a pain when folks try and use open source licenses to cover documentation as it does not really fit :) -- Jody Garnett On Fri, 28 Feb 2020 at 06:36, Pierre Abbat wrote: > On Friday, 28 February 2020 02:40:30 EST Mateusz Loskot wrote: > > Are you considering separate licences, one for source code > > and one for documentation? > > Yes. All the source code files have a note at the top, except the icons, > for > which the note is in the QRC file. The documentation files don't have such > a > note yet. > > Pierre > -- > Lanthanidia deliciosa: What the kiwifruit would be > if it weren't so radioactive. > > > > ___ > Discuss mailing list > Discuss@lists.osgeo.org > https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] License for documentation
On Fri, 28 Feb 2020 at 18:34, Pierre Abbat wrote: > > On Friday, 28 February 2020 09:59:12 EST Mateusz Loskot wrote: > > Unusual, very. > > https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#WhyNotGPLForManuals Well, GPL, that explains why I had no idea of such an approach. Best regards, -- Mateusz Loskot, http://mateusz.loskot.net ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] License for documentation
On Friday, 28 February 2020 09:59:12 EST Mateusz Loskot wrote: > Unusual, very. https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#WhyNotGPLForManuals -- lo ponse be lo mruli ku po'o cu ga'ezga roda lo ka dinko ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] License for documentation
On Fri, 28 Feb 2020, 15:36 Pierre Abbat, wrote: > On Friday, 28 February 2020 02:40:30 EST Mateusz Loskot wrote: > > Are you considering separate licences, one for source code > > and one for documentation? > > Yes. Unusual, very. ML ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] License for documentation
On Friday, 28 February 2020 02:40:30 EST Mateusz Loskot wrote: > Are you considering separate licences, one for source code > and one for documentation? Yes. All the source code files have a note at the top, except the icons, for which the note is in the QRC file. The documentation files don't have such a note yet. Pierre -- Lanthanidia deliciosa: What the kiwifruit would be if it weren't so radioactive. ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] License for documentation
On Fri, 28 Feb 2020 at 03:04, Pierre Abbat wrote: > > PerfectTIN has two documentation files: two pages explaining how to use the > program, and four pages describing the file format (which I just changed, so I > have to edit the doc). There's no license note in the documentation. Which > license should I use, and is it sufficient to put a statement of license in > the > files without putting the license itself in them? Are you considering separate licences, one for source code and one for documentation? Best regards, -- Mateusz Loskot, http://mateusz.loskot.net ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
[OSGeo-Discuss] License for documentation
PerfectTIN has two documentation files: two pages explaining how to use the program, and four pages describing the file format (which I just changed, so I have to edit the doc). There's no license note in the documentation. Which license should I use, and is it sufficient to put a statement of license in the files without putting the license itself in them? Pierre -- The gostak pelled at the fostin lutt for darfs for her martle plave. The darfs had smibbed, the lutt was thale, and the pilter had nothing snave. ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.osgeo.org https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
