Re: [Nano-devel] updates, and relicensing questions...

[Mike Frysinger]

On Thursday 02 August 2007, David Ramsey wrote:
> On 7/31/07, David Ramsey <address@hidden> wrote:
> > I'll look into this too.  I just need time...
>
> Done.
>
> (By "standard CC license", do you mean the Creative Commons
> Attribution-ShareAlike 2.0 license?  That's what I've looked at here.)
> Unfortunately, this seems overly complex as well, seeing as it's meant
> to apply to a lot more than just writing, and I'm not sure I like how it
> brings trademarks in at the end.  Also, the section about having to
> remove any references to licensors/the original author upon request if
> you make a derivative work seems problematic; what happens if they can't
> get ahold of you?  Finally, according to the gnu.org licenses list, it's
> GPL-incompatible...

sorry, i should have mentioned the explicit one i had in mind

CC-BY-SA-3.0 is pretty common in the open source world for documentation ... 
the incompatibility question would come up when mixing documentation with 
different licenses which i dont think is an issue in the nano project ?  
documentation in nano is generated on the fly by people, not copy & pasted 
from other documentation ...

when i hit this point of "all this licensing talk is getting out of hand", i 
just dump stuff into public domain ;)
-mike

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.