* Craig Bradney <cbradney at zip.com.au> [2005-02-04 12:54:22 +0100]:
> On Friday 04 February 2005 12:17, Thomas R. Koll wrote: > > On Fri, Feb 04, 2005 at 11:48:06AM +0100, Craig Bradney wrote: > > > On Friday 04 February 2005 11:24, Thomas R. Koll wrote: > > > > On Fri, Feb 04, 2005 at 09:30:09AM +0100, Craig Bradney wrote: > > > > > On Friday 04 February 2005 08:44, Thomas R. Koll wrote: > > > > > > Other question: Why a by-nc instead of by-sa? It will get a problem > > > > > > for publishers using parts of the docs. > > > > > > > > > > Exactly the idea. > > > > > > > > Then we should include parts of the wiki into the Scribus package. > > > > > > We already include Scribus documentation in the package.. which we intend > > > to be different to that on the wiki. > > > > Sorry, I meant: > > Then we should not include parts of the wiki into the Scribus package. > > The by-nc is considered incompatible by the Debian staff and we surely > > would get problems with that. > > And if we can't include the docs from the wiki, then the wiki makes less > > sense. > > Its only Debian with its interesting ideas that does this. The Debian 1.2.1 > version of Scribus already does not include the documentation but there is a > documentation package in the non-free packages of Debian. All the other > distros are quite happy to package as we do. > > Craig I don't think that this discussion should turn into mocking other people's choices, should it. Respect usually goes two ways. Regards, Alex. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Digital signature Url : http://nashi.altmuehlnet.de/pipermail/scribus/attachments/20050204/dbe3ab79/attachment.pgp
