discuss: licence problems
Subject:
Re: [discuss] licence problems
From:
jdd ####@####.####
Date:
22 Sep 2008 13:47:22 +0100
Message-Id: <48D78D26.4090505@dodin.org>
(the ldp mailing list was out of order for some time, so don't be
surprised if your mails didn't show.)
David Lawyer a écrit :
> On Wed, Sep 17, 2008 at 05:35:11PM +0200, jdd wrote:
>> * I think we agree on the need to use GFDL on the wiki every time it's
>> possible. We have to look closely at this (invariant??) and what it
>> means, but given it's used for wikipedia, it should be good for us :-)
>
> Why can't each wiki have it's own license so long as the license
> allows modification?
it's much too complicated to deal with. Of course we must (should?)
allow a motivated author to use a special licence, but we should also
insist for having a really free licence and this don't seems to be
obvious in the doc world. We should also be aware that we use to have
on stock the man pages with they own licence (more on this later)
I read all GFDL litterature (mostly by RMS) and think now that GFDL
without invariant is the one we should have
jdd
--
http://www.dodin.net
http://valerie.dodin.org
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t-eic8MSSfM
