Hi,
I mentioned this briefly in last week's minutes, but this week we
finalised it all, so I will talk about it in a bit more detail. I am
happy to say that we are going to work on a joint publication with
Creative Commons Australia (CCau), to be launched at the Free as in
Freedom miniconf I am
Well, I would suggest spelling participatory correctly (=p), but other
than that, it sounds like a splendid idea; one that I'd be happy to lend a
hand in.
Cheers,
Craig
---
Craig Franklin
PO Box 1093
Toombul, Q, 4012
Australia
http://www.halo-17.net - Australia's Favourite
2008/11/19 Stephen Bain [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Wed, Nov 19, 2008 at 12:10 AM, Brianna Laugher
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Of course it will be under a free
license, probably CC-BY-SA.
Dual CC-BY-SA / GFDL would be nice, that would make it compatible with
the Wikimedia projects (and our own
I saw somewhere that Wikimedia is changing over to a CC-by-3.x license in
the near future after some changes were made to make compatable with
GDFL/GNU requirements
On 19/11/2008, John Vandenberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Nov 19, 2008 at 12:33 AM, Brianna Laugher
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Wed, 2008-11-19 at 10:46 +1100, Liam Wyatt wrote:
Brianna Wrote:
Anyway dual licensing is of course a possibility, but I'm pretty
sure
as long as CC-BY-SA is in there it doesn't much matter what else is.
:)
Yes, this is my understanding of how the new licensing of GDFL will
interact
Re Liam:
However when you say I've been using CC 3.0 that is not a license per
se - that's a family of licenses (i know you know this already - I'm not
trying to teach you to suck eggs). So, did you mean that the politician
liked the particular license (presumably by-sa) or did you mean that
