On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 16:01, Karsten Wade <kwade@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 06:47:37PM -0400, John J. McDonough wrote: > >> So, what do we gain by going to CC? What do we loose? I have heard some >> folks on Planet objecting to CC for some purposes, but I would need to go >> back and re-read what their problem was and in what context. > > To make one thing clear, we are really talking about (IMO) the CC BY > SA, 3.0 I reckon. This should make sure we don't *lose* any features > of the OPL in the switch. > > Right now the OPL locks us in to a corner where we can only share > content with other OPL sources. That would be fine if it were a > widely used license, which it is not. The CC-BY-SA license says further works would have be shared under the same OR SIMILAR license which would definitely be more flexible for further works. > > The CC BY SA is very widely used. Red Hat Legal weighed in previously > that they prefer this license. My mistaken(?) concerns in the past > about warranty clauses are all covered. > > If we make enough noise and a proper cut-off date, we should prevent > any problems from anyone who has based documents on the OPL-licensed > content. > > I'm not sure that we will find as much content to draw *in* to Fedora, > but we make our work here much more widely relevant. For example, if > someone wanted to maintain a brief installation of Fedora article on > Wikipedia or their website, they could source as much as needed from a > CC BY SA licensed Fedora Installation Guide. The BY assures us that > they'll like back to the truly canonical source. > > - Karsten +1 from me. -- fedora-docs-list mailing list fedora-docs-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-docs-list
