We should write down some simple policy for which licenses we accept into the MyPaint main distribution, primarily to keep things simple for coders and artists. What about the following, expressed in FAQ style?
------------------------------8<---------------------------- DRAFT NOT OFFICIAL * DRAFT NOT OFFICIAL * DRAFT NOT OFFICIAL Q: What licenses should I use when contributing to MyPaint? A: If you want your contribution to go into the official MyPaint distribution, you need to pick a license: 1. All program code and supplemental data files should be GPLv2[1] or LGPL. This includes program icons and artwork for display within the program. 2. Supplemental artworks and promotional material included in the distribution should be CC-Zero, CC-By, or CC-By-SA, version 3 [2]. 3. Elements which are highly likely to be reused by artists in the creation of new works[3], e.g. bundled brushes[4] or background texture images, should be licensed as CC-Zero or Public Domain. You'll get attribution in the official distribution, of course :) DRAFT NOT OFFICIAL * DRAFT NOT OFFICIAL * DRAFT NOT OFFICIAL --------------------------->8------------------------------- Please pick apart point by point. The final tone should be friendly and not too lawyery :) [1] which might in due course be globally updated to GPLv3, as the license permits. Before you ask :) [2] CC licenses (version 3) are almost certainly DFSG-compatible. Versions 2.5 and below are not. We'd really like Debian to pick us up. [3] Background elements are very likely to be reused without the artist giving any thought to licensing. And they shouldn't have to. Therefore it is vital that the license permit that *and* re-licensing. [4] I initially thought that brush settings might be best expressed best as 1. since they're little programs. However brush settings are copied into strokemaps during routine operations, so when you change a setting, paint with the brush and save as .ORA then - *booya!* - you just made a derived work[5]. So it's best if all core brushes are CC-Zero. [5] there's a chance that this might be "mere aggregation", which is a possible escape from this potential trap. We could state that *in our opinion* that's what it is, always, and thus accept GPLed brush code. In fact we may have to do that anyway for grandfathering reasons :/ -- Andrew Chadwick _______________________________________________ Mypaint-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/mypaint-discuss
