[ TL;DR: would you object re-licensing www.d.o content under dual MIT/Expat + GPL-2 ? ]
Hi everybody, as you might have noticed the webmasters have recently restarted [1] the discussion on how to fix this and its "colleague" bug report, #388141. [1] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=388141#206 The initial idea was to separate two concerns: (a) obtaining permission to re-license, (b) pick a license and do the re-licensing. The separation has some appeal: we can fix #388141 without having to fight over a license to fix this bug (#238245) first :-P But it has the important drawback to expose us to a sort of "necessary evil": either seek copyright assignment or seek a blanket permission to relicense under a large set of licenses until we pick one (see [1] for details). We can avoid that by reaching consensus on a license before asking for the re-licensing permission. Which is also a prerequisite to fix this bug. If we can do that quickly we can avoid both the (not so) necessary evil and the risk of losing the current momentum in fixing these issues once and for all! I've been asked to help in reaching consensus on the license choice, so here we go. Looking at past discussions in both #238245 and #388141, I believe there can already be consensus on re-licensing www.debian.org content [2] under a dual-license MIT/Expat + GPL version 2 or above. Would anyone object such a choice? [2] more precisely: all material under webwml, including original content, translation, support scripts, etc) The reasons of the above proposal are: - According to my reading of past discussions, MIT and GPL-2 seem to be viable choices with supporters on both camps - The two licenses are compatible - Dual licensing, introduced above, is to avoid having a default license and an alternative choice; both apply - The "or above", introduced above, is to give some future-proof-ness to the copyleft side, given it supports it (I understand some people have grudges with "or above" clauses; we can drop it if anyone feel strongly about it) What do you think? Thanks for your attention, Cheers. PS I think it would help the discussion if we avoid comments that *only* state "I'd rather go for $license". If you comment in that direction, please also clarifies whether you'd be fine with the above option. Also, please remind that the final word will be, as usual, up to the actual contributors to the Debian website. -- Stefano Zacchiroli zack@{upsilon.cc,pps.jussieu.fr,debian.org} . o . Maître de conférences ...... http://upsilon.cc/zack ...... . . o Debian Project Leader ....... @zack on identi.ca ....... o o o « the first rule of tautology club is the first rule of tautology club »
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
