[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Boilerplate License Revision Proposal


There is no way we are going to make every one happy with this. I suggest
we completely scrap the the biolerplate license. Were not laywers and we
shouldn't pretend to be.

My suggestion to list links to various licenses that are acceptable.

1. OpenContent
2. OpenPublication

If anybody knows any other "documentation" licenses add them to the list.
We should state that if they do not like one of the above licenses then 
they can write their own. If they write their own there should be some
guidelines as to what is acceptable license for documents that will be
included within the LDP.

Joshua Drake

<COMPANY>CommandPrompt	- http://www.commandprompt.com	</COMPANY>
<PROJECT>OpenDocs, LLC.	- http://www.opendocs.org	</PROJECT>
<PROJECT>LinuxPorts 	- http://www.linuxports.com     </PROJECT>
<WEBMASTER>LDP		- http://www.linuxdoc.org	</WEBMASTER>
Instead of asking why a piece of software is using "1970s technology," 
start asking why software is ignoring 30 years of accumulated wisdom. 

To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to ldp-discuss-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org