Karsten Wade wrote: > I also think we should consider dual-licensing over switching > entirely. If anything, there is no advantage to a solid switch, while > dual-licensing gives us flexibility for existing situations, e.g. Red > Hat, CentOS, etc. Also, I like the OPL and don't to disparage it in > the process of widening choices for our contributors and community. All dual licensing has the problem of a singular fork under one of the licenses. Imagine this scenario. * Fedora dual licenses all its content * Joe Random takes content under one of the licenses, CC-BY-SA or OPL and makes a lot of changes but only under one of the license. * Unless Joe Random agrees to relicense under BOTH licenses, he can keep taking content from us and publish it under one of the licenses but we cannot merge back any of his changes. It become a one way fork. That is why a dual license is problematic. All contributions must be under BOTH licenses for it to be effective. Rahul -- fedora-docs-list mailing list fedora-docs-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-docs-list
