discuss: Documentation licensing
Subject:
Re: Documentation Licensing
From:
Emma Jane Hogbin ####@####.####
Date:
8 Apr 2004 19:27:19 -0000
Message-Id: <20040408192545.GK1063@smeagol>
On Thu, Apr 08, 2004 at 08:21:33PM +0100, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> > > I think TLDP doesnt have any explicitly stated
> > criteria for licenses
> > > that are acceptable.
> >
> > Oh yes we do. It's in the Manifesto.
>
> OK. I just read the license requirements and it seems
> to be pretty informal.
I wouldn't say "informal"...I'd say the reviewers are pretty darn strict
about what they let in for new documents with respect to licensing.
http://www.tldp.org/HOWTO/LDP-Reviewer-HOWTO/metadatareview.html
License and Legal Notice. A license is required. The LDP currently accepts
documents which are licensed under the GFDL, Creative Commons License and
the LDP License. If you are using a license that is not listed it will
need to be reviewed by our volunteers before the document is accepted. The
full text of the license is required. A link is not sufficient. You may
wish to include a disclaimer as part of the legal notice. A standard
disclaimer is available from the Author Guide.
Note: this applies to all /new/ documents. It is not a retroactive
requirement for existing documents...yet. ;)
emma
--
Emma Jane Hogbin
[[ 416 417 2868 ][ www.xtrinsic.com ]]
