On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 01:08:01AM +0200, Holger Levsen wrote: > On Sonntag, 17. Juli 2011, Wouter Verhelst wrote: > > Might be a good idea. However, I feel I need to ask: Why not simply move > > to cc-by-sa and 'forget' about the debconf-video license? Or are the two > > incompatible? > > good point. I dont think they are, the old licence is basically the 2clause > bsd licence reworded for video...
In that case, the question is whether we want copyleft or not. If we don't, we could consider using CC-BY-3.0 (without -SA) or keep it as a dual-license. If people don't prefer the 2-clause BSD to the CC-BY-3.0 license for these video's I'd suggest just using CC-BY-3.0 by itself. It is explicitly usable in CC-BY-SA-3.0 works. If we do want to insist on copyleft, we really ought to switch to CC-BY-SA-3.0 alone since the debconf video license isn't. My suggestion is just CC-BY-3.0 (no -SA) by itself. - Jimmy Kaplowitz ji...@debian.org _______________________________________________ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
