On 10 August 2010 21:17, Richard Fairhurst <[email protected]> wrote: > The reason I suggested to LWG that they drop the relicensing option from the > Contributor Terms, and limit future options to CC-BY-SA or ODbL[1], was > precisely that: a spirit of compromise.
And I liked that proposal, I even said so on the talk-au list a week or so ago: http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-au/2010-July/006922.html > Personally I'd love OSM to be PD, yet I suggested a scheme to LWG that would > rule out OSM _ever_ being relicensed as PD. "Compromise" is probably too > mild a word for that. It doesn't rule out PD at all, it just makes it harder to achieve without asking most contributors again. _______________________________________________ talk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
