On Sun, May 4, 2008 at 1:44 AM, Thayer Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On May 04, 2008 12:17 AM PDT, Dan McGee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Sun, May 4, 2008 at 12:38 AM, Thayer Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Excuse the naive question, but while putting together some PKGBUILDs for > > > the Arch artwork stuff, I couldn't find any reference to the Creative > > > Commons licenses in /usr/share/licenses. Am I missing something or > > > do we need to add this to our collection? > > > > > > The Arch Linux logo (and other related artwork) is released under CC > > > license so I want to make sure I flag these properly. > > > > I don't believe it is. I can add it to the package if we have a need > > for it though. If you could track me down a plain-text copy of it or > > point me to a link, that would be great. > > > > -Dan > > I'll do that...I did discover that a couple of packages (e.g. > tango-icon-theme) do use an individual copy of the CC license. > > The thing is, there are several versions of this license and each with > their own version numbers (2.0, 2.5, etc.) so I can see it being a > potential headache. At the same time it's use is becoming mainstream > so it might be worthwhile. > > Anyone else have any thoughts on this?
I think the different versions are fairly compatible (maybe I'm wrong), but you would have to support all the variations for sure: cc-by, cc-by-nc, cc-by-nd, cc-by-nc-nd, cc-by-sa, cc-by-nc-sa, cc-sampling+, cc-nc-sampling+, etc. I suppose we could just add them as we go. How many have you seen in the wild as of yet? Jason
