On Mon, Oct 4, 2010 at 16:06, Jesus M. Castagnetto <je...@castagnetto.com> wrote: > Pardon this old doc dinosaur for meddling in this thread, just a couple of > comments: > - IIRC there was never a "notes group" as such. It was mainly a mailing > list, some code we hacked and some rules of thumb, and whoever had the time > will chip in ad do some notes housekeeping once in a while. Ergo, the notes, > code and text should formally be responsability of the doc group (which is a > changing entity over the years). > > - Not sure as pointed out by Brandon, that theres is a need for licensing > code snippets separately, they usually are exemplars of concepts and > techniques, small and simple, and not significant enough to warrant all that > work (being that there is a provision for "fair use"). I would suggest the > current doc maintainers to use Occam's razor in this respect :-)
its quite scary to apply Occam's razor on legal matters.. :) Robinson point is that the GPL license is incompatible with the current license of all examples and user contributed codes in the manual. Be it edgecase incompatibility or what, we need to take a conscious decision of either ignore it or fix it.. :) -Hannes
