Don't want to throw a rock into the pond but what about all doc contributions made so far by external committers (i.e github PRs). Wouldn't changing the license require everyone to agree to the new terms?
Is it really mandatory to relicense everything to ASL2? What about icon resources found in groovy-console? AFAIk those come from famfamfam's Silk icon set which IIRC are not ASL2 either. Keep it simple. Code is ASL2, resources and docs CC or equivalent, OSI certified and ASf compatible, wouldn't it? Cheers Andres Sent from my primitive Tricorder > On 08/06/2015, at 17:55, Cédric Champeau <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> I think it's easier to release everything under the Apache License if >> possible. Or is there a specific reason to use that Creative Commons >> license? >> > The original reason is that CC is more suited for texts and documentation. It > doesn't imply code. Now I have no problem with migrating to AL2, as long as > it is legally possible. > >> -Bertrand >
