Re: Clarifying blog post licensing

2022-02-05 Thread Maxim Cournoyer
Hi Ludovic, Ludovic Courtès writes: > Hi, > > Maxim Cournoyer skribis: > >> Ludovic Courtès writes: >> >>> Hello Guix! >>> >>> With a few exceptions, our blog posts do not have a license, which is >>> not great as it prevents sharing and reuse, at least by those outside >>> Guix circles (we

Re: Clarifying blog post licensing

2022-02-05 Thread Ludovic Courtès
Hi, Vagrant Cascadian skribis: > Just for clarity, do you mean the GFDL with a laundry-list of non-free > anti-features excluded, like the guix manual: > > Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document > under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version

Re: Clarifying blog post licensing

2022-02-05 Thread Ludovic Courtès
Hi, Maxim Cournoyer skribis: > Ludovic Courtès writes: > >> Hello Guix! >> >> With a few exceptions, our blog posts do not have a license, which is >> not great as it prevents sharing and reuse, at least by those outside >> Guix circles (we discussed it in the past but never got around to

Re: Clarifying blog post licensing

2022-01-29 Thread jbranso
January 27, 2022 12:59 AM, "Jan Nieuwenhuizen" wrote: > Ludovic Courtès writes: > >> With a few exceptions, our blog posts do not have a license, which is >> not great > I agree. Joshua Branson. > -- > Jan Nieuwenhuizen | GNU LilyPond http://lilypond.org > Freelance IT

Re: Clarifying blog post licensing

2022-01-28 Thread Gábor Boskovits
I agree. pelzflorian (Florian Pelz) ezt írta (időpont: 2022. jan. 27., Cs 18:35): > I agree. > > On Wed, Jan 26, 2022 at 10:24:11AM +0100, Ludovic Courtès wrote: > > Hello Guix! > > > > With a few exceptions, our blog posts do not have a license, which is > > not great as it prevents sharing

Re: Clarifying blog post licensing

2022-01-27 Thread pelzflorian (Florian Pelz)
I agree. On Wed, Jan 26, 2022 at 10:24:11AM +0100, Ludovic Courtès wrote: > Hello Guix! > > With a few exceptions, our blog posts do not have a license, which is > not great as it prevents sharing and reuse, at least by those outside > Guix circles (we discussed it in the past but never got

Re: Clarifying blog post licensing

2022-01-26 Thread Jan Nieuwenhuizen
Ludovic Courtès writes: > With a few exceptions, our blog posts do not have a license, which is > not great Good catch, I agree! Janneke -- Jan Nieuwenhuizen | GNU LilyPond http://lilypond.org Freelance IT http://JoyofSource.com | Avatar® http://AvatarAcademy.com

Re: Clarifying blog post licensing

2022-01-26 Thread Tobias Geerinckx-Rice
Vagrant Cascadian 写道: Just for clarity, do you mean the GFDL with a laundry-list of non-free anti-features excluded, like the guix manual: I think that goes without saying, but clarity is good: thanks for bringing it up. Invariants would be a deal-breaker for several of us I'm sure,

Re: Clarifying blog post licensing

2022-01-26 Thread Vagrant Cascadian
On 2022-01-26, Ludovic Courtès wrote: > With a few exceptions, our blog posts do not have a license, which is > not great as it prevents sharing and reuse, at least by those outside > Guix circles (we discussed it in the past but never got around to fixing > it). > > I’d like us to clarify that,

Re: Clarifying blog post licensing

2022-01-26 Thread Tobias Geerinckx-Rice
How does that sound? Excellent. Thanks! T G-R signature.asc Description: PGP signature

Re: Clarifying blog post licensing

2022-01-26 Thread Maxim Cournoyer
Hello, Ludovic Courtès writes: > Hello Guix! > > With a few exceptions, our blog posts do not have a license, which is > not great as it prevents sharing and reuse, at least by those outside > Guix circles (we discussed it in the past but never got around to fixing > it). > > I’d like us to

Re: Clarifying blog post licensing

2022-01-26 Thread Ricardo Wurmus
Ludovic Courtès writes: > With a few exceptions, our blog posts do not have a license, which is > not great as it prevents sharing and reuse, at least by those outside > Guix circles (we discussed it in the past but never got around to fixing > it). > > I’d like us to clarify that, with a

Re: Clarifying blog post licensing

2022-01-26 Thread Oliver Propst
Me too. -- Kinds regards Oliver Propst https://twitter.com/Opropst

Re: Clarifying blog post licensing

2022-01-26 Thread Julien Lepiller
On January 26, 2022 10:24:11 AM GMT+01:00, "Ludovic Courtès" wrote: >Hello Guix! > >With a few exceptions, our blog posts do not have a license, which is >not great as it prevents sharing and reuse, at least by those outside >Guix circles (we discussed it in the past but never got around to

Re: Clarifying blog post licensing

2022-01-26 Thread Efraim Flashner
On Wed, Jan 26, 2022 at 10:24:11AM +0100, Ludovic Courtès wrote: > Hello Guix! > > With a few exceptions, our blog posts do not have a license, which is > not great as it prevents sharing and reuse, at least by those outside > Guix circles (we discussed it in the past but never got around to

Re: Clarifying blog post licensing

2022-01-26 Thread Manolis Ragkousis
I agree! On 1/26/22 11:24, Ludovic Courtès wrote: Hello Guix! With a few exceptions, our blog posts do not have a license, which is not great as it prevents sharing and reuse, at least by those outside Guix circles (we discussed it in the past but never got around to fixing it). I’d like us

Clarifying blog post licensing

2022-01-26 Thread Ludovic Courtès
Hello Guix! With a few exceptions, our blog posts do not have a license, which is not great as it prevents sharing and reuse, at least by those outside Guix circles (we discussed it in the past but never got around to fixing it). I’d like us to clarify that, with a footer on blog posts saying