On Sat, 2 Jun 2007 10:31:41 -0700, Don Armstrong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> On Sat, 02 Jun 2007, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> On Fri, 1 Jun 2007 16:57:25 -0700, Don Armstrong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> said:
>> > 2 doesn't provide the protection of a copyleft license, but it
>> > would enable us to use the work in combination with any other
>> > license, so would be ok.
>>
>> And kinda draconian. Why are we being so hell bent on restricting the
>> free license choices for our contributors? As long as the licenses
>> are free, why dowe feel the need to be in control so much?
> It's not that we need to be in control, but that actually changing the
> license is such a pain that we really only want to do it once. The
> more restrictive the license we pick, the more likely it is we'll have
> to revisit this. Since contributors can't always be contacted, the
> more time passes, the more difficult (or impossible) it will become.
> If it is at all possible, I want to solve it once and not have to
> revisit it again.
If the license is free, we need not be changing it at all,
either now nor in the future.
Indeed, if the initial license is free, there should be no
reason for Debian to ever change the licensing away from the free
license, so it being Hard to do is irrelevant.
The web site is a collection of aggregated works; so I don't see
the need to even have the same free license at all.
manoj
--
"Whom are you?" said he, for he had been to night school. George Ade
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://www.golden-gryphon.com/>
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
