On 06/30/2011 07:26 AM, Richard Fontana wrote: > I don't think this would generally work. What I think might work is a > set of informal domain-specific default licensing policies as an > alternative to, or supplement to, the FPCA. I think you could argue > that that's in effect what is in place already for Fedora > documentation, and you could also argue that it is implemented in part > using explicit licensing. I am not sure how that would look like but if informal domain-specific licensing has more clearly defined boundaries and would not apply to random things like email, I am in favor of this. However if we had a informal set of policies and someone picks up a spec file from Fedora and wants to reuse it outside Fedora, how would they know what rights they have? My goal in pushing towards explicit licensing is in part to make it more obvious what to do in such cases. Is there a alternative? Rahul _______________________________________________ advisory-board mailing list advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/advisory-board
