Amin Bandali wrote:
> Ludovic Courtès writes:
>> I would propose GFDLv1.3+ without invariant sections, since that can then be
>> relicensed to CC-BY-SA should anyone need it.
>
> but reading the text for GFDLv1.3, specifically "11. RELICENSING", it seems
> to me that the explicit permission to
Hi Ludo’, all,
Ludovic Courtès writes:
> Hello,
>
[...]
> I would propose GFDLv1.3+ without invariant sections, since that can
> then be relicensed to CC-BY-SA should anyone need it.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Ludo’.
I'm not a lawyer and this is not legal advice, but reading the text for
GFDLv1.3
Ludovic Courtès 写道：
I would propose GFDLv1.3+ without invariant sections, since that
can
then be relicensed to CC-BY-SA should anyone need it.
Thoughts?
I think that it's a great choice.
Kind regards,
T G-R
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
Hello,
"Zhu Zihao" skribis:
> I want to translate some of Guix's blog into another language, but I don't
> know what license the articles in Guix'blog using, are they using GNU FDL?
Translations would be welcome!
Most articles do not have an explicit license. However, I believe most
authors
"Zhu Zihao" wrote:
> I want to translate some of Guix's blog into another language, but I don't
> know what license the articles in Guix'blog using
A good question!
> are they using GNU FDL?
The repo containing blog posts is, as youʼve already found, is
guix/guix-artwork [1]. Its README
I want to translate some of Guix's blog into another language, but I don't know
what license the articles in Guix'blog using, are they using GNU FDL?
Guix's blog: https://guix.gnu.org/blog/
--
Zihao
