From: Bastien <email@example.com>
To: tycho garen <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Subject: Re: What license for Worg?
Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2010 06:36:45 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <email@example.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100803125324.GB32422@deleuze.linlan> (tycho garen's message of "Tue, 3 Aug 2010 08:53:24 -0400")
tycho garen <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> This seems fine, the only possible concern that I have with this is
> that GFDL licensed code snippets aren't compatible with the GPL. I'm
> not sure how much actual code is in worg, and if this is an issue, but
> it's worth considering.
Mhh.. yes, you're right.
> My impulse for free-software-style writing projects is to use the
> emacs wiki license statement which says CC-BY-SA/GFDL/GPL 3 or later
> (with a clarification of what constitutes "corresponding source
> code"), but that might be a bit vague in some cases.
Here is what I read at the bottom of every emacswiki.org page:
This work is licensed to you under version 2 of the GNU General Public
License. Alternatively, you may choose to receive this work under any
other license that grants the right to use, copy, modify, and/or
distribute the work, as long as that license imposes the restriction
that derivative works have to grant the same rights and impose the
same restriction. For example, you may choose to receive this work
under the GNU Free Documentation License, the CreativeCommons
ShareAlike License, the XEmacs manual license, or similar licenses.
So this is GPLv2. Any idea why this isn't GPLv3?
Also, I find the formulation a bit confusing. Is it the standard
formulation when multi-licensing? Where can I found an example of a
clear multi-licensing statement?
I've not made up my mind yet, but I would go for something like that:
The content of the Worg website is licensed under the CC BY-SA 3.0 and
the GPLv3 and the GFDL 1.3. You can choose to receive the content of
Worg under any of these three licenses.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-08-04 4:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-08-02 12:33 What license for Worg? Bastien
2010-08-02 16:59 ` David Maus
2010-08-02 18:50 ` Bernt Hansen
2010-08-03 9:34 ` Ian Barton
2010-08-04 4:26 ` Bastien
2010-08-13 23:32 ` Eric S Fraga
2010-08-03 12:53 ` tycho garen
2010-08-04 4:36 ` Bastien [this message]
2010-08-08 21:10 ` tycho garen
2010-08-09 19:36 ` David Maus
2010-08-10 1:35 ` Memnon Anon
2010-08-10 15:41 ` Bastien
2010-08-04 5:36 ` Bastien
2010-08-04 7:14 ` Ian Barton
2010-08-06 8:31 ` Bastien
2010-08-06 9:25 ` Andreas Röhler
2010-08-04 12:33 ` Sebastian Rose
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
List information: https://www.orgmode.org/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).