Rob Myers wrote:
> Do you have any models in mind? CC and the FSF have been through a
> couple of rounds of licence revision over the years and the most recent
> ones are easy to review.
I think I tried to get involved with both processes, so I'll offer a
few observations...
CC's 3.0 process see
On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 01:41:06AM +0100, Frederik Ramm wrote:
> * WHAT changes can be made to the license once it is accepted;
I think this should be limited to avoid overstepping. We define the
basic things we want the licence to do—collective attribution, share
alike for derived data sets, agg
On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 08:59:26PM +, 80n wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 12:41 AM, Frederik Ramm wrote:
>
> > * WHAT changes can be made to the license once it is accepted;
> >
>
> If section 11 of the GDFL 3.1 is anything to go by [1], then pretty much
> anything is possible.
GNU licence
Frederik Ramm wrote:
> * WHAT changes can be made to the license once it is accepted;
> * WHO can make these changes (whom do we trust to make them); and
> * HOW will such changes become vetted by the community, if at all.
>
> These are the decisions that can absolutely not be postponed until aft
4 matches
Mail list logo
