On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 11:11:48PM +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote: > 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?
One week into this, it seems no one objected. Most comments have been in favor of this choice; one comment (by Francesco) would prefer a different wording but would pick a functionally equivalent license (MIT/Expat alone). Thanks to everybody. It seems we've consensus on the license choice \o/ On Sat, Jan 21, 2012 at 12:57:59PM -0400, David Prévot wrote: > +Since @@day@@ January 2012, the new material can be redistributed > +and/or modified under the terms of the <a href="legal/licenses/mit">\ > +MIT (Expat) License</a> (which is usually available at > +<url http://www.jclark.com/xml/copying.txt>) or, at your option, of the > +<a href="legal/licenses/gpl2">GNU General Public License</a>; either > +version??2 of the License, or any later version (the latest version is ^^^ as a minor nitpick, I would add "(at your option)" here. Looking forward for David to push the big red button :-) Cheers. -- 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
