Hi everyone,
It's been about a week since I emailed-out information I'd received
from the lawyers about dual-licensing code examples. To date I've
received no responses, so I'm going to be a cheerful optimist here and
hope that people are generally happy with the text as written.
I'd like to
On Mon, Oct 11, 2010 at 4:34 PM, Robinson Tryon
bishop.robin...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Oct 11, 2010 at 4:07 PM, Philip Olson phi...@roshambo.org wrote:
I avoid the topic of licenses whenever possible but let's make a decision.
It feels like most would prefer dual licensing for code snippets
On 10/11/2010 01:07 PM, Philip Olson wrote:
On Oct 4, 2010, at 12:41 PM, Robinson Tryon wrote:
On Mon, Oct 4, 2010 at 3:03 PM, Daniel Browndanbr...@php.net wrote:
I'm of the opinion that we should license all
machine-interpretable examples (i.e. - code snippets) in both the
official
On Tue, Oct 12, 2010 at 8:37 AM, Christopher Jones
christopher.jo...@oracle.com wrote:
I wwould NOT like to see dual licensing. Aside from any likely
legal issues
I think we're all interested in any potential legal issues that
licensing changes could bring. What additional legal issues would
On Oct 4, 2010, at 12:41 PM, Robinson Tryon wrote:
On Mon, Oct 4, 2010 at 3:03 PM, Daniel Brown danbr...@php.net wrote:
I'm of the opinion that we should license all
machine-interpretable examples (i.e. - code snippets) in both the
official documentation usage examples and user-submitted
On Mon, Oct 11, 2010 at 4:07 PM, Philip Olson phi...@roshambo.org wrote:
I avoid the topic of licenses whenever possible but let's make a decision. It
feels like most would prefer dual licensing for code snippets (despite GPL
and PHP not getting along all that well, ever) so let's do that.
On Mon, Oct 11, 2010 at 22:34, Robinson Tryon bishop.robin...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Oct 11, 2010 at 4:07 PM, Philip Olson phi...@roshambo.org wrote:
I avoid the topic of licenses whenever possible but let's make a decision.
It feels like most would prefer dual licensing for code snippets
On Mon, Oct 11, 2010 at 18:04, Hannes Magnusson
hannes.magnus...@gmail.com wrote:
The PHP Documentation Group is not explicitly defined anywhere, so
does that mean this mailinglist? The named authors on
http://php.net/manual? (and does that include the 'and several
others'?) :P
Could the
On Mon, Oct 4, 2010 at 14:15, Brandon Savage bran...@brandonsavage.net wrote:
On Mon, Oct 4, 2010 at 7:24 AM, Hannes Magnusson
hannes.magnus...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Oct 4, 2010 at 12:08, Robinson Tryon bishop.robin...@gmail.com
wrote:
It shouldn't take too long to fix this -- I'd just
On Mon, Oct 4, 2010 at 15:43, Hannes Magnusson
hannes.magnus...@gmail.com wrote:
As for the manual text itself, that attribution note was intentional
choice by us when we changed the license couple of hours ago.
s/hours/years :P
-Hannes
On Mon, Oct 4, 2010 at 12:08, Robinson Tryon bishop.robin...@gmail.com wrote:
It shouldn't take too long to fix this -- I'd just add a note in the
documentation section of the PHP license page along the lines of All
example code in the PHP manual, including user notes, are additionally
On Mon, Oct 4, 2010 at 4:40 AM, Hannes Magnusson
hannes.magnus...@gmail.com wrote:
Actually, when adding a use contributor note the note becomes
'property of the PHP Documentation Group'
See http://no.php.net/manual/add-note.php
This means that any note submitted here becomes the property of
The snippet's owner(s) is the PHP Documentation Group.
The CC-BY license has this explicit notice (in human readable terms):
Attribution — You must attribute the work in the manner specified by
the author or licensor (but not in any way that suggests that they
endorse you or your use of the
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,
On Mon, Oct 4, 2010 at 03:56, Adam Harvey ahar...@php.net wrote:
On 3 October 2010 08:43, Robinson Tryon bishop.robin...@gmail.com wrote:
Is there
any chance that the code examples in the manual are also available
under a different license as well?
As you've seen on the licensing page, the
On Mon, Oct 4, 2010 at 7:24 AM, Hannes Magnusson hannes.magnus...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Mon, Oct 4, 2010 at 12:08, Robinson Tryon bishop.robin...@gmail.com
wrote:
It shouldn't take too long to fix this -- I'd just add a note in the
documentation section of the PHP license page along the
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
On Mon, Oct 4, 2010 at 9:59 AM, Brandon Savage
bran...@brandonsavage.net wrote:
The CC-BY license states [...some things...]
...
This is the provision from which I derived that fair use avoids infringement
even if credit is not given.
(IANAL) but it's entirely possible that a Fair Use
On Mon, Oct 4, 2010 at 13:35, Robinson Tryon bishop.robin...@gmail.com wrote:
If The PHP Doc Group believes that the CC-BY provides a framework
under which a simple attribution line like that is sufficient, then I
suggest they grease the wheels and calm the lawyers by clarifying it
with an
On Mon, Oct 4, 2010 at 3:03 PM, Daniel Brown danbr...@php.net wrote:
I'm of the opinion that we should license all
machine-interpretable examples (i.e. - code snippets) in both the
official documentation usage examples and user-submitted examples
alike - including those from the mailing
On 3 October 2010 08:43, Robinson Tryon bishop.robin...@gmail.com wrote:
Is there
any chance that the code examples in the manual are also available
under a different license as well?
As you've seen on the licensing page, the manual — including the code
examples — is only available under the
21 matches
Mail list logo
