Hey Sam. You're absolutely right, and I appreciate you pointing this out. We need to get this fixed. Actually, as part of coreboot joining the Software Freedom Conservancy, our documentation NEEDS an open license of one sort or another.
Is there a reason we shouldn't switch to CC BY 4.0? - Do we really need BY-SA? How much of the coreboot documentation is applicable anywhere else? Why not just go with the least restrictive license? - Do we really care what Stack Exchange or any other group is using? How much are we copying from them? Here are the CC licenses: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/ Discussion of CC BY-SA vs GFDL :https://wiki.creativecommons.org/wiki/GFDL_versus_CC-by-sa Once we decide which license to switch to, I think we're going to have to remove or rewrite any documentation contributions from people who don't want to agree to the license or who can't be reached. Martin On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 10:53 AM, Sam Kuper <sam.ku...@uclmail.net> wrote: > On 17/03/2017, Sam Kuper <sam.ku...@uclmail.net> wrote: >> Also: sanity check. Does anyone else here besides me and Timothy feel >> that making the wiki documentation available under a free culture >> license would be a good idea? > > A few other wiki users agreed with us, which is great: > > https://www.coreboot.org/User:GNUtoo#Wiki_contributions > > https://www.coreboot.org/User:Samnob > > https://www.coreboot.org/User_talk:Kl3 > > The relative silence about this topic on this mailing list makes me > wonder, though: does anyone here think it would be a *bad* idea for > the Coreboot wiki contents to be under a free culture license? If you > do, would you mind explaining why? > > Thanks! > > -- > coreboot mailing list: coreboot@coreboot.org > https://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot -- coreboot mailing list: coreboot@coreboot.org https://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot
