> On Fri, 8 Feb 2013, Ben de Groot wrote:
> On 8 February 2013 00:31, Alec Warner wrote:
>> On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 8:07 AM, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
>>> So, while in general I'm against renaming of licenses (e.g.,
>>> it would be pointless to rename our GPL-2 to GPL-2.0 in order
>>> to conform
On 8 February 2013 00:31, Alec Warner wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 8:07 AM, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
>> I always wondered why we are using such bulky names like
>> CCPL-Attribution-ShareAlike-2.5 for the Creative Commons licenses,
>> instead of CC-BY-SA-2.5 like everyone else. The latter also use
On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 8:07 AM, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
> I always wondered why we are using such bulky names like
> CCPL-Attribution-ShareAlike-2.5 for the Creative Commons licenses,
> instead of CC-BY-SA-2.5 like everyone else. The latter also used by
> our documentation pages and is the name in t
On 7 February 2013 16:07, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
> I always wondered why we are using such bulky names like
> CCPL-Attribution-ShareAlike-2.5 for the Creative Commons licenses,
> instead of CC-BY-SA-2.5 like everyone else. The latter also used by
> our documentation pages and is the name in the SPD
I always wondered why we are using such bulky names like
CCPL-Attribution-ShareAlike-2.5 for the Creative Commons licenses,
instead of CC-BY-SA-2.5 like everyone else. The latter also used by
our documentation pages and is the name in the SPDX license list [1],
So, while in general I'm against ren
