I know this could become a heated debate, so please try to stay calm, However I'd like the advice of people who care more about it than I do.
Right now only few parts of the desktop configuration specification* have a specific copyright note. So that means most of the work is simply still copyrighted by me (by normal copyright law). The thing is that I don't care about the copyright of the document. I do care, however, about it's success. I'd like to make sure the environment around the specification is as perfect as possibly could be. I don't want to exclude commercial vendors from using/implementing this specification. I don't want to make it impossible to extend the spec. I don't want to make it impossible to create a commercial closed source implementation. Of course I also don't want to make it impossible to create a free software and/or opensource implementation. It would be very nice if extensions would have to be fully publicised if a commercial implementer wanted to (legally) call their implementation compatible with the/my original specification. And it would be nice if that would work recursively (so an extension to an extension should still be fully publicised if they'd want to (legally) call their implementation compatible with the original specification and/or make a reference to the specification). I'm guessing the LGPL license or the GNU Free Documentation License are interesting ones. I'm very interested in any type of advice about this. *) http://pvanhoof.be/short/?s=desktopstandard -- Philip Van Hoof, software developer at x-tend home: me at pvanhoof dot be gnome: pvanhoof at gnome dot org work: vanhoof at x-tend dot be http://www.pvanhoof.be - http://www.x-tend.be _______________________________________________ xdg mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/xdg
